From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pg1-f170.google.com (mail-pg1-f170.google.com [209.85.215.170]) (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 5FF722E0B48 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2026 02:04:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.215.170 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773972260; cv=none; b=JgkDG6uTv1UviPQa7Ayvm6/orVp9aOZS+242sVIjW8sd5r6pKKsH2BkBvrXubAKL8mDWdv1FozfllgD4nkZH1r/KkheYOWlMEAvlYlErq7A/GtP5FxWE2L/ALFiGY51VnT2b93ohdH42/OrC+HNh3kRSHaTxHj31eZ0vqBU1lAw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773972260; c=relaxed/simple; bh=e4O1qswBHehoONgzt/B78p8L7qGsD1GJlEIlnfElYKU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Date:Message-ID:References; b=pX9oHS466UZb1uH8gRb6E+ZPvoYDT06p37lcq2J3W3V/s6AbJYGsie9e6P1gJo4ttkJK0DXtP6L5/FcJSI4YM307+meJljbGIXahBOGRKwdvcS0e9Ew/ZtytZB0hFn3iqWO2p7jKcvypuZMWjbDBpVPnsYI7RIWmWncpCyWn3P4= 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=TYy2JbrR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.215.170 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="TYy2JbrR" Received: by mail-pg1-f170.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-c73fbdd9b53so530124a12.3 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2026 19:04:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1773972255; x=1774577055; 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=DHV98jkPPJadyUUgPILk+xa8pW0vORXFLXmtPXYqpRw=; b=TYy2JbrRAyRGLIuLOc8e+anbMYugfNI9wkLH6pwTrFF+47VUkPHU3HaHNlg+FqAzRs 3K4/uanC0BuhByawLQ2AwNAUlIswjHD0zPD6OCYq9+khIOyK/CQelhahLdfrJ6FQXAXS 3my26vAy9mFztHVPsnz9OlieoxzP2lkTsfJSNZQhvU/DH8ocazQdqSmK1ycEZRWS+qj0 GBiREN9TYGWTsb3gDAPHymDyCXuYmKvfgX9Ud54JRhxc0R3yu5/L4r2YMoYeG7XahQzE 3JaS/12LRIph3Qp/eY60F2tzfR2Bkn3wSUpQk/OOR+fpq/v5fzYzh2rAjDIr+jk8H6kX Toiw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1773972255; x=1774577055; 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=DHV98jkPPJadyUUgPILk+xa8pW0vORXFLXmtPXYqpRw=; b=lBa68QaCz7CHPwIDmK8udO4GdmRJlH5J5ktksqmaLrNy/nNxlRdVUU4sw9TfEOgPj0 qc0UtXHrKebb//178RhcjRhXVy6xIsFwIeBwoNr14Dmu6RinyJa3tc/7U+PsUtyGpZue 7fEERZgss/cp+txkgLFw0+6kkFKFd6uvnzYsB/ThV7yHEPrvSOYa3ed+vVcoDih5bXfY TNvNLXwMEQm7nDe/PJ/KAWw4aXpTAxhZPCUN5a8buFCjGUqc3/OEQ0BjNXy1q/NWmyvF ADCkwP+tnHgL2b4KHXIghWB3i1cWKRq8cW/jKorC/n4a6EwAJsVv0Zw7JxBP5kKeABdp KS8w== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVDvl0YN4a9LrZTVvYqdM8A2QkpuynKXeLV9NSkZadXU2MIQu/yVJ7UECdPMUl6rVlX03GgV2wbnFiJ@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzGek9FReClA7BsqRuMmM20wQ+D/S/JgGBJSccQ1UfHWD3cBbbp +vnMaH+vOX50IvWQzu2cvOkOgak5Q03ChthHO2S7MVssylGowhJg+NZXjyIuEQ+S X-Gm-Gg: ATEYQzzvSG+gxd48qjdd7H21dlvpahaV6XVMvj0cn8yRZfPSTRymf8EAM5dR/bZsjNM 7/62FrDU+NuGyXO45ERGPcQyJSOUEDbmO1NICTWog1IUIljNfWLkoiE8ighsIG68Vx3VDX6LF5X dJiWPaK4PeaKhrZQnzc4iQk+JYUhgcnuMZ1Zlclo922X6orT/w8JI5RdalqCzjw515wgDzHj4B5 v7GUUH0KDjWVe0LmUbfaWCVH/IfPcnGsegexDxlbjjP87aXdqHfvghBm9IaAN4BobMDRhTyL+z4 tbBL89SJhzmFPGj70aJKxC1np3mA57+FOEAGK4ML9XVk8/vQcO0Vb6wKb7ITMOslPMIlWPa42Ws FYX7Jb2kVQdY/WS1Xo2BNutIibuvUTRh61AXNAKtlq6uCviSLt1W1LR2tJ3NVX9Qf6Gq7oAS2oZ QKdR7exUKjJBWtuksor0RamA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4b85:b0:355:35b0:8b78 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-35bd2d105efmr872355a91.27.1773972255362; Thu, 19 Mar 2026 19:04:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pve-server ([49.205.216.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 98e67ed59e1d1-35bd24f1b9csm305196a91.0.2026.03.19.19.04.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 19 Mar 2026 19:04:14 -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, Ojaswin Mujoo Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] ext4: fix the error handling process in extents_kunit_init). In-Reply-To: <20260319125434.333117-4-yebin@huaweicloud.com> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2026 07:26:08 +0530 Message-ID: References: <20260319125434.333117-1-yebin@huaweicloud.com> <20260319125434.333117-4-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 > > Fixes: cb1e0c1d1fad ("ext4: kunit tests for extent splitting and conversion") > Signed-off-by: Ye Bin > Reviewed-by: Ojaswin Mujoo > Reviewed-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) > --- > fs/ext4/extents-test.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents-test.c b/fs/ext4/extents-test.c > index 3d4663d99eb1..4ce3f81f6409 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; Even though the patch looks ok, but still wanted to check if ... Do you think we can move ext4_es_register_shrinker() before setting up the mock inode and on error we simply return err? That way, there won't be any ambiguity in the error handling for calling ext4_es_unregister_shrinker()? > > 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 +319,19 @@ 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; > + > + ext4_es_unregister_shrinker(sbi); -ritesh