On 4/30/19 8:05 AM, Coly Li wrote: > On 2019/4/30 10:02 下午, Coly Li wrote: >> Commit 95f18c9d1310 ("bcache: avoid potential memleak of list of >> journal_replay(s) in the CACHE_SYNC branch of run_cache_set") forgets >> to remove the original define of LIST_HEAD(journal), which makes >> the change no take effect. This patch removes redundant variable >> LIST_HEAD(journal) from run_cache_set(), to make Shenghui's fix >> working. >> >> Reported-by: Juha Aatrokoski <juha.aatrokoski@xxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Shenghui Wang <shhuiw@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Coly Li <colyli@xxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/md/bcache/super.c | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/super.c b/drivers/md/bcache/super.c >> index 0ffe9acee9d8..1b63ac876169 100644 >> --- a/drivers/md/bcache/super.c >> +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/super.c >> @@ -1800,7 +1800,6 @@ static int run_cache_set(struct cache_set *c) >> set_gc_sectors(c); >> >> if (CACHE_SYNC(&c->sb)) { >> - LIST_HEAD(journal); >> struct bkey *k; >> struct jset *j; >> >> > > Hi Jens, > > Please take this fix for the Linux v5.2 bcache series. It fixes a > problem from > [PATCH 18/18] bcache: avoid potential memleak of list of > journal_replay(s) in the CACHE_SYNC branch of run_cache_set > which is already in your for-next branch. > > Thanks to Juha for cache this bug, and thank you in advance for taking > care of this. Applied, but please add Fixes: lines patches like that, it's not enough to simply mention it in the commit message. -- Jens Axboe