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
