On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 15:56:15 -0700 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 5:59 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > I bisected this down to the addition of the proxy_ops into tracefs for > > lockdown. It appears that the allocation of the proxy_ops and then freeing > > it in the destroy_inode callback, is causing havoc with the memory system. > > Reading the documentation about destroy_inode and talking with Linus about > > this, this is buggy and wrong. > > Can you still add the explanation about the inode memory leak to this message? > > Right now it just says "it's buggy and wrong". True. But doesn't > explain _why_ it is buggy and wrong. > Sure. The patches just finished my testing (along with other fixes that I need to send you). I have to make a few other updates in the change log though, so I'll be rebasing them (but not touching the code), to clean up the change logs. -- Steve
