From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60CDCC433DF for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 06:16:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE0902068D for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 06:16:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="hTwbpgCe" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org AE0902068D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linuxfoundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49cJZj218VzDqYJ for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 16:16:29 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linuxfoundation.org (client-ip=198.145.29.99; helo=mail.kernel.org; envelope-from=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linuxfoundation.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=hTwbpgCe; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49cJXn1l4yzDqR5 for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 16:14:47 +1000 (AEST) Received: from localhost (83-86-89-107.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB5A22068D; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 06:14:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1591164885; bh=S2g2RpDgji3qUmc3Z++eaclycufz5rb3P87OS+u0RYE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=hTwbpgCeR3lnlgzpQTl0OccK3xWL9/GCGkqiEaj7wiyWdmtnMpRdeWYU31ZVYwuV5 Mf0zMuug1fzNsA7yhsNmRIL7aoC5dM/ECE4dcROExtT+gWr8OcDl8oUxz4ZUNiYDGp Da0cCStH2QmJSG/fTNAMmE2pt96EDWjXbdD5kmlk= Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2020 08:14:43 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: "wanghai (M)" Subject: Re: [PATCH] cxl: Fix kobject memory leak in cxl_sysfs_afu_new_cr() Message-ID: <20200603061443.GB531505@kroah.com> References: <25ad528b-beaf-820f-9738-ea304dcbc0d7@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <25ad528b-beaf-820f-9738-ea304dcbc0d7@huawei.com> X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Andrew Donnellan , Arnd Bergmann , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Markus Elfring , Ian Munsie , Frederic Barrat , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 09:42:41AM +0800, wanghai (M) wrote: > > 在 2020/6/3 1:20, Markus Elfring 写道: > > > Fix it by adding a call to kobject_put() in the error path of > > > kobject_init_and_add(). > > Thanks for another completion of the exception handling. > > > > Would an other patch subject be a bit nicer? > Thanks for the guidance, I will perfect this description and send a v2 Please note that you are responding to someone that a lot of kernel developers and maintainers have blacklisted as being very annoying and not helpful at all. Please do not feel that you need to respond to, or change any patch in response to their emails at all. I strongly recommend you just add them to your filters to not have to see their messages. That's what I have done. thanks, greg k-h