On 5/1/19 12:43 AM, Coly Li wrote:
> 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.
As I wrote, I already applied it and added the Fixes tag. Just a note
for future patches.
--
Jens Axboe
