On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 06:37:13AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 1/23/25 6:15 PM, Sidong Yang wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 06:36:06AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > > Hi, Jens. > > Thanks for review! > > > >> On 1/23/25 3:50 AM, Sidong Yang wrote: > >>> If futex_wait_setup() fails in io_futex_wait(), Old code just releases > >>> io_futex_data. This patch tries to cache io_futex_data before kfree. > >> > >> It's not that the patch is incorrect, but: > >> > >> 1) This is an error path, surely we do not care about caching in > >> that case. If it's often hit, then the application would be buggy. > >> > >> 2) If you're going to add an io_free_ifd() helper, then at least use it > >> for the normal case too that still open-codes it. > > > > Agreed, So this patch could be make it buggy. You can drop this patch. I'll > > find another task to work on. > > It won't make it buggy, it's just a bit questionnable if it's worth > doing. And if it is, then it should have io_free_ifd() being used in the > other place that puts to the cache as well, to make it complete. I found that io_free_ifd() could be used in io_futex_complete(). It needs same routine that try to cache or kfree. Is it good to make v2 includes changing it? > > -- > Jens Axboe
