On 2019/4/30 10:20 下午, Jens Axboe wrote: > 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. > I just re-send a V2 patch with adding the Fixes: line, thanks for taking care of this. -- Coly Li