From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtpout.efficios.com (smtpout.efficios.com [167.114.26.122]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13CEE4F887; Thu, 8 Feb 2024 22:04:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=167.114.26.122 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707429893; cv=none; b=HRGpOlHSudXx98mraS00fQTeGwymlfkYNU5Qy9R5MefgoqgyiqIeUrYOM1L21IfgyvnEFB8zEWPuiGS/wOjapn8ENrQnFlXvNAqT0MYiqLJM3UxGnKGLIr2UyOfj283O9nvv/R7jdCWHJfWZDY9FguTcrG9kencRzoYpipQ4vwg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707429893; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Lj0yj5k2Ucs4SxuNKFcA0jefNpL/MeJWdfUW/qhrm9Y=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=XZEmVnMVVTVyJQYN9JtdCFv5RCxgD5z6TDtaE+gMUT80HN757GB3j3F/2dHGitEAVktCdoHlOkwaIkVbryFrm8CnihOaLF7hhkYcOi80W//nz+o/7w1vorqK0+rVwt+j20ZA2eK+trLIXePb41fvA8dKUz6MC/q0O/da1qoWQO0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=efficios.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=efficios.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=efficios.com header.i=@efficios.com header.b=QPi9w618; arc=none smtp.client-ip=167.114.26.122 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=efficios.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=efficios.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=efficios.com header.i=@efficios.com header.b="QPi9w618" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=efficios.com; s=smtpout1; t=1707429887; bh=Lj0yj5k2Ucs4SxuNKFcA0jefNpL/MeJWdfUW/qhrm9Y=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=QPi9w618PKwnA9XXOQgmCJB1PCRsMn9Uf67yi2RMSz+npuqM1XhKC7wv0qn/5qaPZ HtBBgHJW61pZKEUsgM3zLsLXEe86GqM9Phz9OBoAMCs4XewbLcgNcWisq0fpdud38S 4+Cak3UtLlm7WZZcn4+/e6iz1E4DwB1CN767MGyarGK4n5Em+teSI+EgIpfRi5kayu FZw7bi34H+EYdcnCWkmUKL9ZD5zDBU6c7Yy7VjUqHCA/Jl05m7ySivgFkCGTg3BslR 2YD+qB8C1BDraBeGGpeO0/Ly1umtbT7QEm6IpByZbYEiI7Av04b1Noi+TDQJ0soltb Y9mP8c1pyefEQ== Received: from [172.16.0.134] (192-222-143-198.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.143.198]) by smtpout.efficios.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4TW9y72DKCzXtH; Thu, 8 Feb 2024 17:04:47 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2024 17:04:52 -0500 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/12] nvdimm/pmem: Fix leak on dax_add_host() failure Content-Language: en-US To: Andrew Morton Cc: Dan Williams , Arnd Bergmann , Dave Chinner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Vishal Verma , Dave Jiang , Matthew Wilcox , Russell King , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, nvdimm@lists.linux.dev, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Alasdair Kergon , Mike Snitzer , Mikulas Patocka References: <20240208184913.484340-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <20240208184913.484340-2-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <20240208132112.b5e82e1720e80da195ef0927@linux-foundation.org> From: Mathieu Desnoyers In-Reply-To: <20240208132112.b5e82e1720e80da195ef0927@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2024-02-08 16:21, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 13:49:02 -0500 Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > >> Fix a leak on dax_add_host() error, where "goto out_cleanup_dax" is done >> before setting pmem->dax_dev, which therefore issues the two following >> calls on NULL pointers: >> >> out_cleanup_dax: >> kill_dax(pmem->dax_dev); >> put_dax(pmem->dax_dev); > > Seems inappropriate that this fix is within this patch series? > > otoh I assume dax_add_host() has never failed so it doesn't matter much. > > > The series seems useful but is at v4 without much sign of review > activity. I think I'll take silence as assent and shall slam it all > into -next and see who shouts at me. > Thanks Andrew for picking it up! Dan just reacted with feedback that will help reducing the patch series size by removing intermediate commits. I'll implement the requested changes and post a v5 in a few days. So far there are not behavior changes requested in Dan's feedback. Should I keep this patch 01/12 within the series for v5 or should I send it separately ? Thanks, Mathieu -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. https://www.efficios.com