On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 06:35:33PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote: > On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 5:38 PM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 05:10:49PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote: > > > Hi Dan, > > > > > > I wonder if we shall split the current patch into two patches, one > > > patch for each memory leak. It is better to satisfy the rule - "one > > > patch only fixes one issue". > > > > > > We should absolutely fix all these memory leaks. But one patch for two > > > different bugs with different objects and different paths is not very > > > suitable. > > > > > > > I would just send one patch, because I only see it as one bug. But you > > do what you think is best. > > If you think they are the same bug, that's great. Just send and apply > only one patch as it is. I will not send version v2. Sorry for the miscommunication. That's not what I meant at all. Your patch only introduces one put_device(). We need all five to fix the bug, and we'll have to change the kfree(link_whatever). Use device_unregister() instead put_device(). Include a Reported-by with the correct syzkaller information. > > BTW, could you please show me the syzbot link for the bug you tried to > resolve? If it is not from syzbot dashboard, can you please show the > bug report? What are you talking about? I'm not trying to fix a syzkaller bug. I'm just reviewing your patch. regards, dan carpenter
