Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Feb 2012 12:56:52 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] hw breakpoint: Fix possible memory leak |
| |
* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 11:44 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > I edited that code earlier today - is the form below OK, or can > > you see a simpler method? It's not yet pushed out so can still > > edit it. > > I think something like the below should do, but then I didn't really > think much about it, my thoughts went like: > > ... *shees* that's ugly > ... that error path already does a loop > ... what the problem is!? -- reread changelog > ... err_cpu == cpu is placed wrong! > > > So I replied and marked read.. waiting to either hear if there's a good > reason to do ugly or find a new (tested) patch in my inbox.. :-) > > --- > kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c | 4 ++-- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c b/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c > index b0309f7..3330022 100644 > --- a/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c > +++ b/kernel/events/hw_breakpoint.c > @@ -658,10 +658,10 @@ int __init init_hw_breakpoint(void) > > err_alloc: > for_each_possible_cpu(err_cpu) { > - if (err_cpu == cpu) > - break; > for (i = 0; i < TYPE_MAX; i++) > kfree(per_cpu(nr_task_bp_pinned[i], cpu)); > + if (err_cpu == cpu) > + break; > }
Looks a lot nicer - I'll wait for an updated patch.
Thanks,
Ingo
| |