From: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
To: "Pekka Enberg" <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Christoph Lameter" <clameter@sgi.com>,
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix memory leak in mm/slab.c::alloc_kmemlist() (try #3)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 01:54:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200603220154.16266.jesper.juhl@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9a8748490603200055p7be38dc8lac2e78f4798e6def@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Pekka, Andrew, Christoph & everyone else,
On Monday 20 March 2006 09:55, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> Hi Pekka,
>
> On 3/19/06, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> > On 3/18/06, Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Currently the only caller of alloc_kmemlist() will BUG() if alloc_kmemlist()
> > > fails, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't clean up properly IMHO. Also, the
> > > caller (do_tune_cpucache()) could maybe be changed in the future to do
> > > something more clever than just BUG() and in that case we really shouldn't
> > > be leaking memory when we return -ENOMEM.
> >
> > Yeah, and BUG() can be no-op for embedded.
> >
> > On 3/18/06, Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The patch has been compile and boot tested on x86, but since I'm not very
> > > intimate with the slab code I'd appreciate it if someone would take a close
> > > look on the changes before merging them.
> >
> > You probably didn't hit the error path on your x86 box. The patch
> > looks good to me for -mm although there's few comments below.
> >
> > > +/*
> > > + If one or more allocations fail we need to undo all allocations done up to
> > > + this point.
> > > + Unfortunately this means yet another loop, but since this only happens on
> > > + failure and frees up memory in a memory-tight situation, it's not too bad.
> > > + */
> >
> > The formatting of this comment looks strange.
> >
> > > + for_each_online_node(node) {
> > > + if (count <= 0)
> > > + break;
> > > + if (cachep->nodelists[node]) {
> >
> > Would probably make sense to extract the above expression into local
> > variable to reduce kernel text size.
> >
> > > + kfree(cachep->nodelists[node]->shared);
> > > + free_alien_cache(cachep->nodelists[node]->alien);
> > > + kfree(cachep->nodelists[node]);
> > > + cachep->nodelists[node] = NULL;
> > > + }
> > > + count--;
> > > + }
> > > + return -ENOMEM;
> >
>
> Thank you very much for your feedback.
>
> I'll create an updated patch with the changes you suggest. They make
> perfect sense.
>
Here's the latest version of my patch to fix the mem leak in alloc_kmemlist().
It should address Pekkas's comments.
Andrew: Do you think this could go into -mm and get some field testing, so
perhaps it has a chance of making 2.6.17?
Fix memory leak in mm/slab.c::alloc_kmemlist().
If one allocation fails we have to roll-back all allocations made up to the
point of failure.
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
---
mm/slab.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
1 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6-mm2-orig/mm/slab.c 2006-03-18 16:55:55.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6-mm2/mm/slab.c 2006-03-21 22:33:45.000000000 +0100
@@ -3399,12 +3399,17 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kmem_cache_name);
static int alloc_kmemlist(struct kmem_cache *cachep)
{
int node;
+ int count = -1;
struct kmem_list3 *l3;
- int err = 0;
+ struct array_cache *new;
+ struct array_cache **new_alien;
for_each_online_node(node) {
- struct array_cache *nc = NULL, *new;
- struct array_cache **new_alien = NULL;
+ struct array_cache *nc = NULL;
+
+ new = NULL;
+ new_alien = NULL;
+ count++;
#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
new_alien = alloc_alien_cache(node, cachep->limit);
if (!new_alien)
@@ -3447,10 +3452,29 @@ static int alloc_kmemlist(struct kmem_ca
cachep->batchcount + cachep->num;
cachep->nodelists[node] = l3;
}
- return err;
+ return 0;
+/**
+ * If one or more allocations fail we need to undo all allocations done up to
+ * this point. Unfortunately this means yet another loop, but since this only
+ * happens on failure and frees up memory in a memory-tight situation, it's
+ * not too bad.
+ */
fail:
- err = -ENOMEM;
- return err;
+ kfree(new);
+ free_alien_cache(new_alien);
+ for_each_online_node(node) {
+ if (count <= 0)
+ break;
+ l3 = cachep->nodelists[node];
+ if (l3) {
+ kfree(l3->shared);
+ free_alien_cache(l3->alien);
+ kfree(l3);
+ cachep->nodelists[node] = NULL;
+ }
+ count--;
+ }
+ return -ENOMEM;
}
struct ccupdate_struct {
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-22 0:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-18 20:37 [PATCH] fix memory leak in mm/slab.c::alloc_kmemlist() (try #2) Jesper Juhl
2006-03-19 18:40 ` Pekka Enberg
2006-03-20 8:55 ` Jesper Juhl
2006-03-22 0:54 ` Jesper Juhl [this message]
2006-03-22 1:10 ` [PATCH] fix memory leak in mm/slab.c::alloc_kmemlist() (try #3) Christoph Lameter
2006-03-22 1:35 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-03-22 1:46 ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-22 1:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-03-22 2:29 ` Christoph Lameter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200603220154.16266.jesper.juhl@gmail.com \
--to=jesper.juhl@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox