Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 9 Nov 2022 09:33:39 +0000
From:   =?iso-8859-1?Q?Lu=EDs?= Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de>
To:     Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>
Cc:     Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ceph: fix memory leak in mount error path when using
 test_dummy_encryption
Message-ID: <Y2tz8zQPlTWtfOdw@suse.de>
References: <20221108143421.30993-1-lhenriques@suse.de>
 <215b729e-0af0-45d8-96af-3d3c319581c9@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <215b729e-0af0-45d8-96af-3d3c319581c9@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 11:08:49AM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote:
> 
> On 08/11/2022 22:34, Lu?s Henriques wrote:
> > Because ceph_init_fs_context() will never be invoced in case we get a
> > mount error, destroy_mount_options() won't be releasing fscrypt resources
> > with fscrypt_free_dummy_policy().  This will result in a memory leak.  Add
> > an invocation to this function in the mount error path.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Lu?s Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de>
> > ---
> > * Changes since v1:
> > 
> > As suggested by Xiubo, moved fscrypt free from ceph_get_tree() to
> > ceph_real_mount().
> > 
> > (Also used 'git format-patch' with '--base' so that the bots know what to
> > (not) do with this patch.)
> > 
> >   fs/ceph/super.c | 1 +
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/ceph/super.c b/fs/ceph/super.c
> > index 2224d44d21c0..f10a076f47e5 100644
> > --- a/fs/ceph/super.c
> > +++ b/fs/ceph/super.c
> > @@ -1196,6 +1196,7 @@ static struct dentry *ceph_real_mount(struct ceph_fs_client *fsc,
> >   out:
> >   	mutex_unlock(&fsc->client->mount_mutex);
> > +	ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(fsc);
> >   	return ERR_PTR(err);
> >   }
> > 
> > base-commit: 8b9ee21dfceadd4cc35a87bbe7f0ad547cffa1be
> > prerequisite-patch-id: 34ba9e6b37b68668d261ddbda7858ee6f83c82fa
> > prerequisite-patch-id: 87f1b323c29ab8d0a6d012d30fdc39bc49179624
> > prerequisite-patch-id: c94f448ef026375b10748457a3aa46070aa7046e
> > 
> LGTM.
> 
> Thanks Luis.
> 
> Could I fold this into the previous commit ?

Yes, sure.  I'm fine with that.

Cheers,
--
Lu?s