From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yuanhan Liu Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Memory leak when adding/removing vhost_user ports Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 20:08:47 +0800 Message-ID: <20160712120847.GE26521@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> References: <1467807898-27772-1-git-send-email-christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com> <20160706130812.GP26521@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: patrik.r.andersson@ericsson.com, thomas.monjalon@6wind.com, dev@dpdk.org To: Christian Ehrhardt Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDCC7968 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:06:12 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160706130812.GP26521@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 09:08:12PM +0800, Yuanhan Liu wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 02:24:57PM +0200, Christian Ehrhardt wrote: > > Hi, > > while checking for dpdk 16.07 what backports are accepted in the meantime so I > > can drop them I found this particular discussion has been silently forgotten by > > all of us. > > Not really. As later I found that my patch was actually wrong (besides > the issue you already found). I will revisit this issue thoroughly when > get time, hopefully, next week. Here it is: vhost_destroy() will be invoked when: - QEMU quits gracefully - QEMU terminates unexpectedly Meaning, there should be no memory leak. I think we are fine here (I maybe wrong though, feeling a bit dizzy now :( --yliu