From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pl1-f181.google.com (mail-pl1-f181.google.com [209.85.214.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1372C42050 for ; Sat, 14 Mar 2026 12:34:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.181 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773491676; cv=none; b=gt9YcnUtcsm08WwtCGSXoQ1Tz43Wi8xDk/UrAnJkx2eB0P9BHCssZPuOKpRpEogKGrLnEqwdQ0Q2KT5lwcOCaKMw2EzSXeMorVArdHOSyjBhosOJmFLqwuWFUBaBSDho0YzWDMTnicICMveUPOb0PZjgUWcEhH7IpmsSXf+Hql8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773491676; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xS6hNX9VhN5lnOejmpSufG/MuZHTI6oJ07QGjumd4LQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Date:Message-ID:References; b=UKfJtdZyGEVztvKNQ22eAWO8W6oS1rsNGXPXnzdy/AwU1jALsfjKfJGyFsI3k5CRA5BAIBrQH2O8dm3jIyJs/23yAcFqIpPBm+5Ub3cVLpefczu/PrYyBk2FC0W8ETT14syufu8Zz/YWaYh+gz5+gXOIXc1dHW+WbSMICGTunfc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=Ee7hpJLp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.181 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Ee7hpJLp" Received: by mail-pl1-f181.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-2ad9a9be502so18886485ad.0 for ; Sat, 14 Mar 2026 05:34:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1773491674; x=1774096474; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=references:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=H1VhISShyDoYe84twz9OuGp3Hr1WFGfuBi01CLXAnvA=; b=Ee7hpJLpfqc9B5cVmwOT/Lq+rJ4YNieiX+qexihsXOxuOsiAAoDi40N7tgYQtkMJNr buMoaPkfph5thKpP1ub2VNVSCIsy4nTcAQUxJgBEOaSgDpUKdJSUj6cmO3Z5BrMMlFzF z5czLB+qs+XbPP2L3+FV/QtqyGAqLaZyheF+XtY9Yt6ybjTCQayUim4SZUeOQMJ+em+I TWRTYIL998YSZAnUDpRe6vN95LDWNJqYfXvJKz6JKHtCt70gyhRMLCkUWwwbEfPz6+rJ Je5wJRjmY6wfG4wy1CDolqBr2mL58zPrsv3iUXBv/0xFS3NDVgOf9Mm7JMyIbZa8iLt3 Ry0w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1773491674; x=1774096474; h=references:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=H1VhISShyDoYe84twz9OuGp3Hr1WFGfuBi01CLXAnvA=; b=VSOIrlAwmfi+AoKaZpZHTxZcNtyGunypEdqWtSjNJS5SNVbLsktyyUt2siq6h80r0a 2huGI6+iC7RaYFKCnTM4bTvzSyUeY+XH89roIDG5giD4a3g/YvtjlZnwM3ycp+Wapp4+ ZtQek3venTmgJydtlfLB4tDOqFY+VBOgi4eK/CJMzVPSqfVYxrIAMjIHm1QjPZFtIBkN 7GUKyyt4v5oe8IzqLR5MNsX+OzTKESkPrBcRZV2fiQBbJ4ja4M40BnXklwDlqizXsono fGAP+tdnld0kAPPaTX84eLMQhdUUOGNuo90+3DBCIr/xGdn153Pk4XfqcoJCRbcIyQBp z+ow== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCX5p4mH5ZptuUW9mCyopWnkoSYpx2tlGn2c04YrOtksH9BgOSTn3UpZq86YDJGR5P8t9sWcw3UKZlD2@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywlw79WP7h+l+Ktobwdbp2Tpf5fDUKCtA8J/4DtMcF4r7EJ661u trv19sn+3I+D94tjIHBKMOwxbo2sBPVW5V/JH8ih5Enlq+js5+rTuMTS X-Gm-Gg: ATEYQzw97CswC9vwB956gK6fvWmoLMB0xAKn8aNCm1MyLbsuYBQ9YF135Ox32H5VE+W iV18I7qpN52Lpahjr3aqANSF1JzyDFCAGp3hOKCQ31MjYq84tXSZZtmCwYwZuzIj8FbjaFd+TLV Bl5rgfzspDBY4/6vjXAPJUUJwtCHFx9O/DgYQXze8MYzv5omXSf9nKp67JFCP/u75F7VVJpeq45 uyQv++FTL0fK7oBg2O+DRtx5xSYW89b4wnK+B9rEmo6ueOzoSY51yq6TUYDaaOXOA1YBpzXTBXO QnxnfDKMf8ADVxv1gsAzvBgKhUPL7H8nxtq3LwfIJMV1g9OOs5KDh6VivtdRov3MlWIf88g81xf bcQTaya2pDBvwROHG2aQw8zfd+NUIJNmcLQGpsT4JuXfD3SX0/XG78WkYeCX/97Z5nd0eKx1jyf Jmw7QYzKNpKHRIDf4qzcAmrA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:124e:b0:2ae:abe9:b391 with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-2aecaa9515cmr78694545ad.24.1773491674348; Sat, 14 Mar 2026 05:34:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pve-server ([49.205.216.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-2aece60e6f6sm51887755ad.28.2026.03.14.05.34.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 14 Mar 2026 05:34:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) To: Ye Bin , tytso@mit.edu, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Cc: jack@suse.cz Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] ext4: fix the error handling process in extents_kunit_init). In-Reply-To: <20260314074903.1314851-4-yebin@huaweicloud.com> Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2026 17:59:42 +0530 Message-ID: References: <20260314074903.1314851-1-yebin@huaweicloud.com> <20260314074903.1314851-4-yebin@huaweicloud.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Ye Bin writes: > From: Ye Bin > > The error processing in extents_kunit_init() is improper, causing > resource leakage. > Reconstruct the error handling process to prevent potential resource > leaks > Minor nit. > Fixes: cb1e0c1d1fad ("ext4: kunit tests for extent splitting and conversion") > Signed-off-by: Ye Bin > --- > fs/ext4/extents-test.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents-test.c b/fs/ext4/extents-test.c > index 3d4663d99eb1..543236a31e13 100644 > --- a/fs/ext4/extents-test.c > +++ b/fs/ext4/extents-test.c > @@ -225,33 +225,37 @@ static int extents_kunit_init(struct kunit *test) > (struct kunit_ext_test_param *)(test->param_value); > int err; > > - sb = sget(&ext_fs_type, NULL, ext_set, 0, NULL); > - if (IS_ERR(sb)) > - return PTR_ERR(sb); > - > - sb->s_blocksize = 4096; > - sb->s_blocksize_bits = 12; > - > sbi = kzalloc_obj(struct ext4_sb_info); > if (sbi == NULL) > return -ENOMEM; > > + sb = sget(&ext_fs_type, NULL, ext_set, 0, NULL); > + if (IS_ERR(sb)) { > + kfree(sbi); > + return PTR_ERR(sb); > + } > + > sbi->s_sb = sb; > sb->s_fs_info = sbi; > > + sb->s_blocksize = 4096; > + sb->s_blocksize_bits = 12; > + > if (!param || !param->disable_zeroout) > sbi->s_extent_max_zeroout_kb = 32; > > /* setup the mock inode */ > k_ctx.k_ei = kzalloc_obj(struct ext4_inode_info); > - if (k_ctx.k_ei == NULL) > - return -ENOMEM; > + if (k_ctx.k_ei == NULL) { > + err = -ENOMEM; > + goto out_deactivate; > + } > ei = k_ctx.k_ei; > inode = &ei->vfs_inode; > > err = ext4_es_register_shrinker(sbi); > if (err) > - return err; > + goto out_deactivate; > > ext4_es_init_tree(&ei->i_es_tree); > rwlock_init(&ei->i_es_lock); > @@ -267,8 +271,10 @@ static int extents_kunit_init(struct kunit *test) > inode->i_sb = sb; > > k_ctx.k_data = kzalloc(EXT_DATA_LEN * 4096, GFP_KERNEL); > - if (k_ctx.k_data == NULL) > - return -ENOMEM; > + if (k_ctx.k_data == NULL) { > + err = -ENOMEM; > + goto out_deactivate; > + } > > /* > * set the data area to a junk value > @@ -313,6 +319,20 @@ static int extents_kunit_init(struct kunit *test) > up_write(&sb->s_umount); > > return 0; > + > +out_deactivate: > + kfree(k_ctx.k_ei); > + k_ctx.k_ei = NULL; > + > + kfree(k_ctx.k_data); > + k_ctx.k_data = NULL; > + > + if (sbi->s_es_shrinker) > + ext4_es_unregister_shrinker(sbi); I don't think this extra check is necessary. ext4_es_unregister_shrinker() already has checks in place. Reviewed-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) > + deactivate_locked_super(sb); > + kfree(sbi); > + > + return err; > } > > /* > -- > 2.34.1