xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix memory leak in xlog_recover_add_to_trans

To: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix memory leak in xlog_recover_add_to_trans
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:35:36 -0500
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5245C195.1080704@xxxxxxx>
References: <20130927140104.515578025@xxxxxxx> <5245B86F.3030309@xxxxxxxxxxx> <5245C195.1080704@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
On 9/27/13 12:34 PM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> On 09/27/13 11:55, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 9/27/13 9:00 AM, tinguely@xxxxxxx wrote:
>>> Free the memory in error path of xlog_recover_add_to_trans().
>>> Normally this memory is freed in recovery pass2, but is leaked
>>> in the error path.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mark Tinguely<tinguely@xxxxxxx>
>>
>> For this local leak & the fix,
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Since this gets called in a loop from xlog_recover_process_data(),
>> I'm wondering what happens to previously-allocated items, if we
>> return an error and never get to pass2?
>>
>> (I could be off base, haven't really followed it through, but
>> it seems like they might leak).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Eric
> 
> yeah you are correct, it looks like it gets leaked.
> I will add it to the list.

Thanks.  I suppose maybe if it's cleaned up at a higher level,
it doesn't need to be done here, but (*shrug*) I'll let you work
that out.  :)

-Eric

> Thanks.
> 
> --Mark.
> 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>