[PATCH 04/06] mptfusion: mptctl_release is required in mptctl.c

[PATCH 04/06] mptfusion: mptctl_release is required in mptctl.c

[Kashyap, Desai]

Added missing release callback for file_operations mptctl_fops.
Without release callback there will be never freed. It remains on 
mptctl's eent list even after the file is closed and released.

Relavent RHEL bugzilla is 660871

Signed-off-by: Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@lsi.com>
---
diff --git a/drivers/message/fusion/mptctl.c b/drivers/message/fusion/mptctl.c
index a3856ed..e8deb8e 100644
--- a/drivers/message/fusion/mptctl.c
+++ b/drivers/message/fusion/mptctl.c
@@ -597,6 +597,13 @@ mptctl_event_process(MPT_ADAPTER *ioc, EventNotificationReply_t *pEvReply)
 }
 
 static int
+mptctl_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)
+{
+	fasync_helper(-1, filep, 0, &async_queue);
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int
 mptctl_fasync(int fd, struct file *filep, int mode)
 {
 	MPT_ADAPTER	*ioc;
@@ -2815,6 +2822,7 @@ static const struct file_operations mptctl_fops = {
 	.llseek =	no_llseek,
 	.fasync = 	mptctl_fasync,
 	.unlocked_ioctl = mptctl_ioctl,
+	.release =	mptctl_release,
 #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
 	.compat_ioctl = compat_mpctl_ioctl,
 #endif

Re: [stable] [PATCH 04/06] mptfusion: mptctl_release is required in mptctl.c

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 03:33:00PM +0530, Kashyap, Desai wrote:
> 
> Added missing release callback for file_operations mptctl_fops.
> Without release callback there will be never freed. It remains on 
> mptctl's eent list even after the file is closed and released.
> 
> Relavent RHEL bugzilla is 660871
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@lsi.com>
> ---

<snip>

This is NOT the way to get patches into a stable kernel release.  Please
read the file, Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt for how to do it
properly.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH 04/06] mptfusion: mptctl_release is required in mptctl.c

[Desai, Kashyap]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@kroah.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 10:50 PM
> To: Desai, Kashyap
> Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com;
> Prakash, Sathya; Moore, Eric; stable@kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [stable] [PATCH 04/06] mptfusion: mptctl_release is
> required in mptctl.c
> 
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 03:33:00PM +0530, Kashyap, Desai wrote:
> >
> > Added missing release callback for file_operations mptctl_fops.
> > Without release callback there will be never freed. It remains on
> > mptctl's eent list even after the file is closed and released.
> >
> > Relavent RHEL bugzilla is 660871
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@lsi.com>
> > ---
> 
> <snip>
> 
> This is NOT the way to get patches into a stable kernel release.
> Please
> read the file, Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt for how to do it
> properly.


Greg, Thanks for the redirecting to correct process. I understood that I have to add "CC: stable@kernel.org " in header of the patch itself instead of 
CCing stable@kernel.org from email client.
Do I need to resend those patches?

~ Kashyap

> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

Re: [stable] [PATCH 04/06] mptfusion: mptctl_release is required in mptctl.c

[Greg KH]

On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 12:20:59PM +0530, Desai, Kashyap wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@kroah.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 10:50 PM
> > To: Desai, Kashyap
> > Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com;
> > Prakash, Sathya; Moore, Eric; stable@kernel.org
> > Subject: Re: [stable] [PATCH 04/06] mptfusion: mptctl_release is
> > required in mptctl.c
> > 
> > On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 03:33:00PM +0530, Kashyap, Desai wrote:
> > >
> > > Added missing release callback for file_operations mptctl_fops.
> > > Without release callback there will be never freed. It remains on
> > > mptctl's eent list even after the file is closed and released.
> > >
> > > Relavent RHEL bugzilla is 660871
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@lsi.com>
> > > ---
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > This is NOT the way to get patches into a stable kernel release.
> > Please
> > read the file, Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt for how to do it
> > properly.
> 
> 
> Greg, Thanks for the redirecting to correct process. I understood that
> I have to add "CC: stable@kernel.org " in header of the patch itself
> instead of CCing stable@kernel.org from email client.
> Do I need to resend those patches?

To get these into a stable release?  I don't know, that's up to the
subsystem maintainer if he is going to be willing to edit the patch and
add that line himself.

I'd defer and resend it to make sure it gets there.

good luck,

greg k-h

RE: [stable] [PATCH 04/06] mptfusion: mptctl_release is required in mptctl.c

[James Bottomley]

On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 12:20 +0530, Desai, Kashyap wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@kroah.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 10:50 PM
> > To: Desai, Kashyap
> > Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org; James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com;
> > Prakash, Sathya; Moore, Eric; stable@kernel.org
> > Subject: Re: [stable] [PATCH 04/06] mptfusion: mptctl_release is
> > required in mptctl.c
> > 
> > On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 03:33:00PM +0530, Kashyap, Desai wrote:
> > >
> > > Added missing release callback for file_operations mptctl_fops.
> > > Without release callback there will be never freed. It remains on
> > > mptctl's eent list even after the file is closed and released.
> > >
> > > Relavent RHEL bugzilla is 660871
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@lsi.com>
> > > ---
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > This is NOT the way to get patches into a stable kernel release.
> > Please
> > read the file, Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt for how to do it
> > properly.
> 
> 
> Greg, Thanks for the redirecting to correct process. I understood that I have to add "CC: stable@kernel.org " in header of the patch itself instead of 
> CCing stable@kernel.org from email client.
> Do I need to resend those patches?

Well, as I said, I need the series split into enhancements and bug
fixes ... so why not do that with a resend and add it?

James