From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley-d9PhHud1JfjCXq6kfMZ53/egYHeGw8Jk@public.gmane.org>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin"
<mst-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Suman Anna <s-anna-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>,
Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad-Ix1uc/W3ht7QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
virtualization-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org,
linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
open-iscsi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: DEFINE_IDA causing memory leaks? (was Re: [PATCH 1/2] virtio: fix memory leak of virtio ida cache layers)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:58:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1442512709.4073.24.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150917171529.GA15447-piEFEHQLUPpN0TnZuCh8vA@public.gmane.org>
On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 13:15 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 09:48:37AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > Well, there's an easy fix for that. We could have ida_remove() actually
> > free the bitmap and not cache it if it's the last layer. That way ida
> > would naturally empty and we wouldn't need a destructor. Tejun, would
> > that work?
>
> Yeah, that definitely is one way to go about it. It kinda muddles the
> purpose of ida_destroy() tho. I suppose we can rename it to
> idr_remove_all() and then do the same to idr. I'm not particularly
> objecting to all that but what's wrong with just calling idr_destroy()
> on exit paths? If missing the call in modules is an issue, maybe we
> can just annotate idr/ida with debugobj?
The argument is that we shouldn't have to explicitly destroy a
statically initialized object, so
DEFINE_IDA(someida);
Should just work without having to explicitly do
ida_destory(someida);
somewhere in the exit code. It's about usage patterns. Michael's
argument is that if we can't follow the no destructor pattern for
DEFINE_IDA() then we shouldn't have it at all, because it's confusing
kernel design patterns. The pattern we would have would be
struct ida someida:
ida_init(&someida);
...
ida_destroy(&someida);
so the object explicitly has a constructor matched to a destructor.
James
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "open-iscsi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to open-iscsi+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To post to this group, send email to open-iscsi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>,
Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, open-iscsi@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: DEFINE_IDA causing memory leaks? (was Re: [PATCH 1/2] virtio: fix memory leak of virtio ida cache layers)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 10:58:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1442512709.4073.24.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150917171529.GA15447@htj.duckdns.org>
On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 13:15 -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 09:48:37AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > Well, there's an easy fix for that. We could have ida_remove() actually
> > free the bitmap and not cache it if it's the last layer. That way ida
> > would naturally empty and we wouldn't need a destructor. Tejun, would
> > that work?
>
> Yeah, that definitely is one way to go about it. It kinda muddles the
> purpose of ida_destroy() tho. I suppose we can rename it to
> idr_remove_all() and then do the same to idr. I'm not particularly
> objecting to all that but what's wrong with just calling idr_destroy()
> on exit paths? If missing the call in modules is an issue, maybe we
> can just annotate idr/ida with debugobj?
The argument is that we shouldn't have to explicitly destroy a
statically initialized object, so
DEFINE_IDA(someida);
Should just work without having to explicitly do
ida_destory(someida);
somewhere in the exit code. It's about usage patterns. Michael's
argument is that if we can't follow the no destructor pattern for
DEFINE_IDA() then we shouldn't have it at all, because it's confusing
kernel design patterns. The pattern we would have would be
struct ida someida:
ida_init(&someida);
...
ida_destroy(&someida);
so the object explicitly has a constructor matched to a destructor.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-17 17:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-17 0:29 [PATCH 0/2] Fix memory leaks in virtio & remoteproc cores Suman Anna
2015-09-17 0:29 ` Suman Anna
2015-09-17 0:29 ` [PATCH 1/2] virtio: fix memory leak of virtio ida cache layers Suman Anna
2015-09-17 0:29 ` Suman Anna
2015-09-17 5:33 ` DEFINE_IDA causing memory leaks? (was Re: [PATCH 1/2] virtio: fix memory leak of virtio ida cache layers) Michael S. Tsirkin
2015-09-17 5:33 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2015-09-17 6:51 ` Hannes Reinecke
[not found] ` <20150917082425-mutt-send-email-mst-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2015-09-17 6:51 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-09-17 6:51 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-09-17 22:32 ` Suman Anna
2015-09-17 22:32 ` Suman Anna
2015-09-17 14:15 ` James Bottomley
2015-09-17 14:15 ` James Bottomley
2015-09-17 15:10 ` Tejun Heo
2015-09-17 15:10 ` Tejun Heo
2015-09-17 16:06 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2015-09-17 16:06 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
[not found] ` <20150917190538-mutt-send-email-mst-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2015-09-17 16:48 ` James Bottomley
2015-09-17 16:48 ` James Bottomley
2015-09-17 17:15 ` Tejun Heo
2015-09-17 17:15 ` Tejun Heo
[not found] ` <20150917171529.GA15447-piEFEHQLUPpN0TnZuCh8vA@public.gmane.org>
2015-09-17 17:58 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2015-09-17 17:58 ` James Bottomley
2015-09-17 18:00 ` Tejun Heo
2015-09-17 18:00 ` Tejun Heo
2015-09-17 0:29 ` [PATCH 2/2] remoteproc: fix memory leak of remoteproc ida cache layers Suman Anna
2015-09-17 0:29 ` Suman Anna
2015-11-26 9:38 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2015-11-26 9:38 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2015-11-26 10:37 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2015-11-26 15:47 ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
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=1442512709.4073.24.camel@HansenPartnership.com \
--to=james.bottomley-d9phhud1jfjcxq6kfmz53/egyhegw8jk@public.gmane.org \
--cc=htejun-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mst-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=ohad-Ix1uc/W3ht7QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=open-iscsi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org \
--cc=s-anna-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org \
--cc=virtualization-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org \
/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.