From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] test: fix memory leak in ring autotest
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2017 11:49:01 +0000
Message-ID: <a5e3a95f-4012-fcd9-27fc-ee366d3153e0@intel.com>
References: <9d5a3bc7a779b2dddab4256aa3e0631737861f98.1513867589.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
 <5dee0afeaa0d007dfc9d949b1975c97537585ca4.1513867589.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
 <20171222162642.brpmnqhtovmlwxe2@platinum>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org
To: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
In-Reply-To: <20171222162642.brpmnqhtovmlwxe2@platinum>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 22-Dec-17 4:26 PM, Olivier MATZ wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 10:12:07AM +0000, Anatoly Burakov wrote:
>> Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")
> 
> Not sure about this commit id: freeing rings is only possible
> since commit 4e32101f9b01 ("ring: support freeing").

You're correct, i'll fix it in v2.

> 
> [...]
> 
>> @@ -894,6 +895,8 @@ test_ring(void)
>>   	/* dump the ring status */
>>   	rte_ring_list_dump(stdout);
>>   
>> +	rte_ring_free(r);
>> +
>>   	return 0;
> 
> I think this is incorrect: r is a static variable, and if it is
> not set to NULL, it will be reused at next call.

The point of these changes is not to leave any memory allocated after 
the test is done, regardless of whether it will be reused again.

> 
> Ideally, removing the static variable would be better than just
> resetting the value to NULL, but it will require more modifications:
> add a ring argument to test function, and change return -1 -> goto fail.
> 

...or rewrite it with the testsuite and do proper setup and teardown :) 
Anyway, i'll implement the suggestion in v2.

-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly