On 10.07.2018 14:02, bacor@xxxxxxxx wrote: > I ran into the exact same problem described in this thread: > https://marc.info/?l=linux-can&m=144803311311632&w=4. I am using the > exact same kernel, j1939 stack and target. > > Unlike what it was done in this thread, I did not remove the > put_session() function called in j1939tp_rxtask since it introduce a > memory leak. > > I managed to get it work by applying the following patch but I'm not > sure if what this change entails ? > > diff --git a/net/can/sj1939/transport.c b/net/can/sj1939/transport.c > index 26eccc0..d336083 100644 > --- a/net/can/sj1939/transport.c > +++ b/net/can/sj1939/transport.c > @@ -119,8 +119,8 @@ static inline void j1939session_destroy(struct > session *session) > kfree_skb(session->skb); > hrtimer_cancel(&session->rxtimer); > hrtimer_cancel(&session->txtimer); > - tasklet_disable(&session->rxtask); > - tasklet_disable(&session->txtask); > + tasklet_disable_nosync(&session->rxtask); > + tasklet_disable_nosync(&session->txtask); > kfree(session); > } > Your code example looks ancient. I would recommend to use latest version: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mkl/linux-can-next.git/log/?h=j1939
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
