Re: [PATCH v5] x86: UV uv_tlb.c cleanup

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Tue May 24 2011 - 11:19:24 EST



Well, so you have changed this current sequence in uv_init_per_cpu():

> ...
> return 1;

> kfree(uvhub_descs);
> kfree(uvhub_mask);
> [ ...]
> return 0;

to:

> + if (summarize_uvhub_sockets(nuvhubs, uvhub_descs, uvhub_mask))
> + goto fail;


> kfree(uvhub_descs);
> kfree(uvhub_mask);
> [ ...]
> + init_per_cpu_tunables();
> return 0;
> +
> +fail:
> + kfree(uvhub_descs);
> + kfree(uvhub_mask);
> + return 1;

Don't the kfree()s get changed - i.e. the patch has a side-effect?

And yes, while this might be a kmem leak fix, it is a fix and a *SIDE EFFECT*
which i explicitly asked to be queued in a separate patch(es) from the large
cleanup patch ...

The cleanup patch should be a cleanup of existing code - even if that code has
bugs. Nothing more. Bug fixes are for different patches.

Thanks,

Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/