>That means if I do kmalloc in a module and unload the module without kfree then that memory is lost and kernel wont be able to use that >memory in future. Right?
Oops! Apologies for repeating the question. Yeah people already have said yes for this question in this thread. Thanks On 1/24/08, sahlot arvind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >And, memory allocated by pages are considered "kernel memory". So > >unless you mark them somehow, there is no difference between the ones > >allocated by module, syscall and so on. > > Makes sense! > That means if I do kmalloc in a module and unload the module without kfree > then that memory is lost and kernel wont be able to use that memory in > future. Right? > > > On 1/24/08, Mulyadi Santosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi... > > On Jan 24, 2008 1:32 PM, sahlot arvind <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > Thanks to all for their resonse! > > > > > > Ok, just one thing - > > > When I do lsmod - > > > it shows the memory used by loaded LKMs. So if there is a leak in LKM1 > > then > > > after executing the function (which is doing kmalloc but forgetting to > > do > > > kfree) of LKM1, lsmod should report an increased memory usage by LKM1. > > Am I > > > right? > > > > I doubt it. I guess lsmod just show initialized+text size section, not > > allocated pages during runtime of the module. > > > > And, memory allocated by pages are considered "kernel memory". So > > unless you mark them somehow, there is no difference between the ones > > allocated by module, syscall and so on. > > > > regards, > > > > Mulyadi. > > > >
