Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754022Ab2B0Mpw (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2012 07:45:52 -0500 Received: from mail-pw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:48271 "EHLO mail-pw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753688Ab2B0Mpv (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2012 07:45:51 -0500 Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of namhyung@gmail.com designates 10.68.197.163 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=namhyung@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=namhyung@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] hw breakpoint: Fix possible memory leak From: Namhyung Kim To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar , Namhyung Kim , Paul Mackerras , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , LKML , Frederic Weisbecker In-Reply-To: <1330340694.11248.64.camel@twins> References: <1330311739-24302-1-git-send-email-namhyung.kim@lge.com> <1330338785.11248.49.camel@twins> <20120227104452.GA6082@elte.hu> <1330340694.11248.64.camel@twins> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 21:45:42 +0900 Message-ID: <1330346742.1782.7.camel@leonhard> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1706 Lines: 55 2012-02-27 (Mon), 12:04 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 11:44 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > I edited that code earlier today - is the form below OK, or can > > you see a simpler method? It's not yet pushed out so can still > > edit it. > > I think something like the below should do, but then I didn't really > think much about it, my thoughts went like: > > ... *shees* that's ugly > ... that error path already does a loop > ... what the problem is!? -- reread changelog > ... err_cpu == cpu is placed wrong! > > > So I replied and marked read.. waiting to either hear if there's a good > reason to do ugly or find a new (tested) patch in my inbox.. :-) > > --- > kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c | 4 ++-- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c b/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c > index b0309f7..3330022 100644 > --- a/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c > +++ b/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c > @@ -658,10 +658,10 @@ int __init init_hw_breakpoint(void) > > err_alloc: > for_each_possible_cpu(err_cpu) { > - if (err_cpu == cpu) > - break; > for (i = 0; i < TYPE_MAX; i++) > kfree(per_cpu(nr_task_bp_pinned[i], cpu)); > + if (err_cpu == cpu) > + break; > } > > return -ENOMEM; > This would depend on the initial value of the percpu memory, and thus have no problem in this case. It looks better to me, too :) -- Regards, Namhyung Kim -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/