lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: DEFINE_IDA causing memory leaks? (was Re: [PATCH 1/2] virtio: fix memory leak of virtio ida cache layers)
Hello, James.

On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 10:58:29AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> The argument is that we shouldn't have to explicitly destroy a
> statically initialized object, so
>
> DEFINE_IDA(someida);
>
> Should just work without having to explicitly do
>
> ida_destory(someida);
>
> somewhere in the exit code. It's about usage patterns. Michael's
> argument is that if we can't follow the no destructor pattern for
> DEFINE_IDA() then we shouldn't have it at all, because it's confusing
> kernel design patterns. The pattern we would have would be
>
> struct ida someida:
>
> ida_init(&someida);
>
> ...
>
> ida_destroy(&someida);
>
> so the object explicitly has a constructor matched to a destructor.

Yeah, I get that. I'm just not convinced that this matters enough
especially if we can get debugobj/ksan/whatever trip on it.

Thanks.

--
tejun


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-09-17 20:21    [W:0.524 / U:0.312 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site