From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3FBA6614.357049F8@inostor.com> From: "James G. Sack (jim)" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [linux-lvm] Inconsistent LVM code in 2.4.23-rc1 Sender: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Errors-To: linux-lvm-admin@sistina.com Reply-To: linux-lvm@sistina.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed Nov 19 07:22:15 2003 List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: linux-lvm@sistina.com, Mauelshagen@Sistina.com [Hope this reaches the right place -- I'm not on any list -- please reply/cc direct] Linux kernel 2.4.23-rc1 has LVM patched code that differs from LVM 1.0.8 (as well as cvs HEAD) from sistina.com Q: is the 2.4.23 code OK? if yes, should it be in cvs if no, should somebody tell Marcelo? In essance, there are extra calls to vfree(snap_lv_ptr) at 4 places in lvm_do_vg_create() by virtue of a "goto copy_fault" --AND-- what looks like a correction to vg_ptr->pe_allocated A simple diff looks like ------------------------ 1587,1588c1587 < if (minor >= ABS_MAX_VG) { < kfree(vg_ptr); --- > if (minor >= ABS_MAX_VG) 1590d1588 < } 1658c1656,1657 < goto copy_fault; --- > lvm_do_vg_remove(minor); > return -EFAULT; 1669c1668,1669 < goto copy_fault; --- > lvm_do_vg_remove(minor); > return -EFAULT; 1679c1679,1680 < goto copy_fault; --- > lvm_do_vg_remove(minor); > return -EFAULT; 1682c1683,1684 < goto copy_fault; --- > lvm_do_vg_remove(minor); > return -EFAULT; 1697,1700d1698 < copy_fault: < lvm_do_vg_remove(minor); < vfree(snap_lv_ptr); < return -EFAULT; 2597c2595 < vg_ptr->pe_allocated -= old_lv->lv_allocated_le; --- > vg_ptr->pe_allocated -= old_lv->lv_allocated_snapshot_le; 2598a2597 > old_lv->lv_allocated_snapshot_le = new_lv->lv_allocated_le; --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Regards, ..jim