From: Simon Kagstrom <simon.kagstrom@netinsight.net>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org, e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
Bruce Allan <bruce.w.allan@intel.com>,
Carolyn Wyborny <carolyn.wyborny@intel.com>,
Don Skidmore <donald.c.skidmore@intel.com>,
Greg Rose <gregory.v.rose@intel.com>,
PJ Waskiewicz <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@intel.com>,
Alex Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>,
John Ronciak <john.ronciak@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] e100: Correct firmware memory leak
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 11:05:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110530110518.2ee637d8@marrow.netinsight.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110523090700.68cdf15a@marrow.netinsight.se>
Hi again,
On Mon, 23 May 2011 09:07:00 +0200
Simon Kagstrom <simon.kagstrom@netinsight.net> wrote:
> kmemcheck reports
>
> unreferenced object 0xcfaf4f00 (size 32):
> comm "ifconfig", pid 682, jiffies 87369
> backtrace:
> [<c00252b4>] save_stack_trace+0x20/0x24
> [<c00a5f98>] create_object+0x118/0x20c
> [<c00a61a8>] kmemleak_alloc+0x40/0x84
> [<c00a2de4>] kmem_cache_alloc+0x114/0x1a4
> [<c016ce50>] _request_firmware+0x3c/0x540
> [<c016d3f8>] request_firmware+0x14/0x18
> [<c0170774>] e100_hw_init+0xf0/0x3d8
> [<c0171340>] e100_up+0x38/0x16c
> [<c0171494>] e100_open+0x20/0x54
> [<c019779c>] dev_open+0xcc/0x134
> [<c0196cf0>] dev_change_flags+0xb0/0x190
> [<c01e0998>] devinet_ioctl+0x2f0/0x6fc
> [<c01e1dc4>] inet_ioctl+0xcc/0x104
> [<c01861d8>] sock_ioctl+0x200/0x25c
> [<c00b4cbc>] vfs_ioctl+0x34/0x78
> [<c00b5400>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x4e4/0x53c
> [..]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/e100.c b/drivers/net/e100.c
> index b0aa9e6..f2b44ef 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/e100.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/e100.c
> @@ -1320,6 +1320,8 @@ static void e100_setup_ucode(struct nic *nic, struct cb *cb,
> cb->u.ucode[min_size] |= cpu_to_le32((BUNDLESMALL) ? 0xFFFF : 0xFF80);
>
> cb->command = cpu_to_le16(cb_ucode | cb_el);
> +
> + release_firmware(fw);
> }
This patch can be dropped, I've made a mistake. I think there is a
memory leak when the driver is unloaded, since nic->fw is never
released, but that has to be solved in another way.
It's also not as serious since it only happens on module unload, not on
taking down the interface as indicated above.
// Simon
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-30 9:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-23 7:07 [PATCH] e100: Correct firmware memory leak Simon Kagstrom
2011-05-30 9:05 ` Simon Kagstrom [this message]
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=20110530110518.2ee637d8@marrow.netinsight.se \
--to=simon.kagstrom@netinsight.net \
--cc=alexander.h.duyck@intel.com \
--cc=bruce.w.allan@intel.com \
--cc=carolyn.wyborny@intel.com \
--cc=donald.c.skidmore@intel.com \
--cc=e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=gregory.v.rose@intel.com \
--cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=john.ronciak@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@intel.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).