On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 05:43:38PM +0530, Anant Thazhemadam wrote: > > On 12/09/20 5:17 pm, Greg KH wrote: > > Note, your "To:" line seemed corrupted, and why not cc: the bpf mailing > > list as well? > Oh, I'm sorry about that. I pulled the emails of all the people to whom > this mail was sent off from the header in lkml mail, and just cc-ed > everyone. > > > You leaked memory :( > > > > Did you test this patch? Where do you free this memory, I don't see > > that happening anywhere in this patch, did I miss it? > > Yes, I did test this patch, which didn't seem to trigger any issues. > It surprised me so much, that I ended up sending it in, to have > it checked out. You might not have noticed the memory leak if you were not looking for it. How did you test this? > I wasn't sure where exactly the memory allocated here was > supposed to be freed (might be why the current implementation > isn't exactly using kzalloc). I forgot to mention it in the initial mail, > and I was hoping that someone would point me in the right direction > (if this approach was actually going to be considered, that is, which in > retrospect I now feel might not be the best thing) It has to be freed somewhere, you wrote the patch :) But back to the original question here, why do you feel this change is needed? What does this do better/faster/more correct than the code that is currently there? Unless you can provide that, the change should not be needed, right? thanks, greg k-h
