From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Christie Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] libfc: fix mem leak in fc_tm_done() Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 20:55:09 -0500 Message-ID: <4CC8D7FD.3070608@cs.wisc.edu> References: <1288229055.1431.46.camel@fritz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1288229055.1431.46.camel@fritz> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: devel-bounces-s9riP+hp16TNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org Errors-To: devel-bounces-s9riP+hp16TNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org To: Robert Love Cc: Hillf Danton , devel-s9riP+hp16TNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org, linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On 10/27/2010 08:24 PM, Robert Love wrote: > On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 20:37 +0800, Hillf Danton wrote: >> There seems frame should get freed against memory leakage. >> >> Signed-off-by: Hillf Danton >> --- >> >> --- a/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_fcp.c 2010-09-13 07:07:38.000000000 +0800 >> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_fcp.c 2010-10-25 20:31:04.000000000 +0800 >> @@ -1294,6 +1294,7 @@ static void fc_tm_done(struct fc_seq *se >> */ >> if (!fsp->seq_ptr || !fsp->wait_for_comp) { >> spin_unlock_bh(&fsp->scsi_pkt_lock); > > I wonder if this should be a fc_fcp_unlock_pkt(fsp) since we get the > lock with the fc_fcp_lock_pkt(fsp) call above. > Did I do that. I think you are right. Not sure what happened if it was me.