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:   Thu, 21 Jan 2021 14:28:46 +0100
From:   Javier =?utf-8?B?R29uesOhbGV6?= <javier@javigon.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc:     Pan Bian <bianpan2016@163.com>, Matias Bjorling <mb@lightnvm.io>,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lightnvm: fix memory leak when submit fails
Message-ID: <20210121132846.4t4ijlogfi2pndpf@mpHalley.local>
References: <20210121072202.120810-1-bianpan2016@163.com>
 <55045608-01cb-d5af-682b-5a213944e33d@kernel.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <55045608-01cb-d5af-682b-5a213944e33d@kernel.dk>
Precedence: bulk

On 21.01.2021 05:47, Jens Axboe wrote:
>On 1/21/21 12:22 AM, Pan Bian wrote:
>> The allocated page is not released if error occurs in
>> nvm_submit_io_sync_raw(). __free_page() is moved ealier to avoid
>> possible memory leak issue.
>
>Applied, thanks.
>
>General question for Matias - is lightnvm maintained anymore at all, or
>should we remove it? The project seems dead from my pov, and I don't
>even remember anyone even reviewing fixes from other people.
>

At least from the pblk side, I have no objections to removing it. I test
briefly that pblk runs on new releases, but there are no new features or
known bug fixes coming in.

Current deployments - to the best of my knowledge - are forks, which are
not being retrofitted upstream.

For completeness, I get a number of questions and request primarily from
the academia. These people will probably accuse the lack of LightNVM. I
understand though that this is not an argument to keep it.

Javier