Re: [PATCH] leak less memory in failure paths of alloc_rt_sched_group()

["Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>]

On 03/03/2008, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
>
>  On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 00:09 +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote:
>  > In kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c::alloc_rt_sched_group() we currently do
>  > some paired memory allocations, and if one fails we bail out without
>  > freeing the previous one.
>  >
>  > If we fail inside the loop we should proably roll the whole thing back.
>  > This patch does not do that, it simply frees the first member of the
>  > paired alloc if the second fails. This is not perfect, but it's a simple
>  > change that will, at least, result in us leaking a little less than we
>  > currently do when an allocation fails.
>  >
>  > So, not perfect, but better than what we currently have.
>  > Please consider applying.
>
>
> Doesn't the following handle that:
>
>  sched_create_group()
>  {
>  ...
>         if (!alloc_rt_sched_group())
>                 goto err;
>  ...
>
>  err:
>         free_sched_group();
>  }
>
>
>  free_sched_group()
>  {
>  ...
>         free_rt_sched_group();
>  ...
>  }
>
>  free_rt_sched_group()
>  {
>         free all relevant stuff
>  }
>

Hmmm, it might. I must admit I only looked at alloc_rt_sched_group()
isolated, and what I saw looked like leaks. It seems I need to do a
more thorough reading of the code to be dead sure.

-- 
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
Don't top-post  http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please      http://www.expita.com/nomime.html

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>