From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14D507F52 for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:34:14 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <5245C195.1080704@sgi.com> Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:34:13 -0500 From: Mark Tinguely MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix memory leak in xlog_recover_add_to_trans References: <20130927140104.515578025@sgi.com> <5245B86F.3030309@sandeen.net> In-Reply-To: <5245B86F.3030309@sandeen.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 09/27/13 11:55, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 9/27/13 9:00 AM, tinguely@sgi.com wrote: >> Free the memory in error path of xlog_recover_add_to_trans(). >> Normally this memory is freed in recovery pass2, but is leaked >> in the error path. >> >> Signed-off-by: Mark Tinguely > > For this local leak & the fix, > > Reviewed-by: Eric Sandeen > > Since this gets called in a loop from xlog_recover_process_data(), > I'm wondering what happens to previously-allocated items, if we > return an error and never get to pass2? > > (I could be off base, haven't really followed it through, but > it seems like they might leak). > > Thanks, > -Eric yeah you are correct, it looks like it gets leaked. I will add it to the list. Thanks. --Mark. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs