On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 08:32:23PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/01, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > B1;2601;0cOn Fri, 1 Feb 2013, Tommi Rantala wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Trinity discovered a task_struct leak with clock_nanosleep(),
> > > reproducible with:
> > >
> > > -----8<-----8<-----8<-----
> > > #include <time.h>
> > >
> > > static const struct timespec req;
> > >
> > > int main(void) {
> > > return clock_nanosleep(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID,
> > > TIMER_ABSTIME, &req, NULL);
> > > }
> > > -----8<-----8<-----8<-----
>
> posix_cpu_timer_create()->get_task_struct() I guess...
>
> Cough. I am not sure I ever understood this code, but now it certainly
> looks as if I never saw it before.
Looks on do_cpu_nanosleep() we call posix_cpu_timer_create(), but we do
not call posix_cpu_timer_del() at the end. Fix will not be super simple,
since we need to care about error cases. I can cook a patch if nobody
else want to do this.
Stanislaw
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
