From: channing <chao.bi@intel.com>
To: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jslaby@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] TTY: memory leakage in tty_buffer_find()
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 10:37:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1372300638.2390.103.camel@bichao> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51CAE1DD.8070301@hurleysoftware.com>
On Wed, 2013-06-26 at 08:43 -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
> On 06/26/2013 04:51 AM, channing wrote:
> >
> > In tty_buffer_find(), it scans all tty buffers in
> > free buffer queue, if it finds matched one,
> > tty->buf.free will point to matched one's next buffer,
> > so tty buffers that ahead of matched one are removed
> > from free queue, they will never be used but they
> > are not released, then memory leak happen.
>
> Actually, the whole scan loop is wrong: only tty buffers of
> size 256 are added to the free list.
>
Agree that currently all tty buffers of free list are with size
of 256, but are we sure that the scan loop in tty_buffer_find()
is wrong and should abandon? From the purpose of tty_buffer_find(),
I understand it shall scan the free list, but now it doesn't make
sense because tty_buffer_free() makes all the free list buffers
with size of 256:
tty_buffer_free()
{
if (b->size >= 512)
kfree(b);
}
I don't know why it's 512? looks like a hard configuration?
Can we make it configurable instead of a fixed value?
I understand, although no memory leak, there is logic mess between
tty_buffer_find() and tty_buffer_free(), either one shall make
change to keep accordance?
which one to make change might depends on original purpose of
creating the free list. I tried to find the history of tty_buffer_free(),
but "512" is here since 2.6.32.61, I didn't find older version.
> So this can't leak because a buffer will never be found
> mid-list.
>
> Greg has a patch series from me that reduces this but it's not
> yet in next.
>
> Regards,
> Peter Hurley
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-27 2:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-26 8:51 [PATCH] TTY: memory leakage in tty_buffer_find() channing
2013-06-26 8:55 ` Jiri Slaby
2013-06-26 9:01 ` Jiri Slaby
2013-06-26 12:43 ` Peter Hurley
2013-06-27 2:37 ` channing [this message]
2013-06-27 12:44 ` Peter Hurley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1372300638.2390.103.camel@bichao \
--to=chao.bi@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.