Hi,
On 05/24/12 09:02, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> @@ -1438,15 +1439,6 @@ void dm_dispatch_request(struct request *rq)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dm_dispatch_request);
>
> -static void dm_rq_bio_destructor(struct bio *bio)
> -{
> - struct dm_rq_clone_bio_info *info = bio->bi_private;
> - struct mapped_device *md = info->tio->md;
> -
> - free_bio_info(info);
> - bio_free(bio, md->bs);
> -}
> -
> static int dm_rq_bio_constructor(struct bio *bio, struct bio *bio_orig,
> void *data)
> {
> @@ -1461,7 +1453,6 @@ static int dm_rq_bio_constructor(struct bio *bio, struct bio *bio_orig,
> info->tio = tio;
> bio->bi_end_io = end_clone_bio;
> bio->bi_private = info;
> - bio->bi_destructor = dm_rq_bio_destructor;
The destructor may also be called from blk_rq_unprep_clone(),
which just puts bio.
So this patch will introduce a memory leak.
Please check this comment as well:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2012-May/msg00216.html
Thanks,
--
Jun'ichi Nomura, NEC Corporation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
