2 Sep
2025
2 Sep
'25
6:25 p.m.
On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 08:27:59AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Tue, 2 Sep 2025 16:51:47 +0200 Matthieu Baerts wrote:
It is unclear why a second scan is needed and only the second one caught something. Was it the same with the strange issues you mentioned in driver tests? Do you think I should re-add the second scan + cat?
Not sure, cc: Catalin, from experience it seems like second scan often surfaces issues the first scan missed.
It's some of the kmemleak heuristics to reduce false positives. It does a checksum of the object during scanning and only reports a leak if the checksum is the same in two consecutive scans.
--
Catalin