Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sun, 5 Jul 2020 13:24:14 +0800
From:   Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
To:     "liwei (GF)" <liwei391@huawei.com>
Cc:     Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
        Mike Leach <mike.leach@linaro.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@arm.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf tools: Fix record failure when mixed with ARM
 SPE event
Message-ID: <20200705052414.GC14142@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s>
References: <20200623123141.27747-1-liwei391@huawei.com>
 <20200623123141.27747-3-liwei391@huawei.com>
 <20200702230322.GB471976@xps15>
 <5d872f6f-3665-5abd-7251-13926a70f793@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5d872f6f-3665-5abd-7251-13926a70f793@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 12:06:15PM +0800, liwei (GF) wrote:

[...]

Thanks for Mathieu's looping and agreed with his comments.

> > Last but not least do you know where the memory allocated for array arm_spe_pmus
> > is released?  If you can't find it either then we have a memory leak and it
> > would be nice to have that fixed.
>
> Yes, we have a memory leak here indeed, i forgot to free it in this function.
> As 'arm_spe_pmus' is defined as static, i think the author meant to assign it only at the first call,
> but this function is only called once when we executing 'record', should i go on fixing it
> or just drop the patch 1?

I personally think patch 1 is reasonable.  So for fixing memory leak,
I did a quick check, it's good to release the array "arm_spe_pmus" in
the function auxtrace_record__init(), since the array is only used in
this function.

Thanks,
Leo