From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n8MFKRrp199484 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:20:27 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 3770D16B5763 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:21:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id XKzVDhIKB5WeZGdf for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:21:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4AB8EB80.80707@sandeen.net> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:21:36 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] xfs_repair: fix record_allocation list manipulation References: <4AB300CC.5020707@sandeen.net> <4AB4EDBC.9050609@sandeen.net> <20090922120231.GB8143@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20090922120231.GB8143@infradead.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs-oss Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 09:42:04AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> clang found this one too as a "Dead assignment" >> >> Unless my pointer-fu is totally messed up, this function >> was never actually updating the list head. >> >> This would mean that the later free_allocations() calls in >> incore_ext_teardown() and free_rt_dup_extent_tree() don't >> actually free any items, and therefore leak memory. >> >> V2: now with correct pointer-fu. > > Barry already had this in his repair speedups patchkit, but I left it > out for now because I wasn't too sure how this could work at all. Hm, the patch as reposted does indeed free the allocations; I double checked .... on a fairly large filesystem I saw about 10MB of memory that was lost otherwise; not huge. > After reviewing it again I noticed that it can actually work the original code can work? > because the > addr pointer in the ba_rec_t is unused, and we make use of the fact that > the ba_rec_t is the first field in the structure to be tacked. Entirely > to subtile for my taste. Id' prefer to just put a list_head into the > extent_alloc_rec_t and rt_extent_alloc_rec_t and openconde the > tracking/freeing of the beast. The list_head if just as large as the > ba_rec_t and make sure the list handlinjg is right, and the openconding > gets rid of the annoying assumption that the ba_rec_t is the first thing > in the structure to be tracked. It should also be a net-removal of > code. Yeah, that sounds better. IF barry's speedups stuff obsoletes this work should I just put it on the shelf for now? Sorry; you're probably at linuxcon, I'm having a hard time parsing all of the quick reply ;) -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs