On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:47:39 +0800, jing zhang <zj.barak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2010/3/22, tytso@xxxxxxx <tytso@xxxxxxx>:
> > On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 10:01:06PM +0800, jing zhang wrote:
> >> From: Jing Zhang <zj.barak@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> Date: Sun Mar 21 21:59:35 2010
> >>
> >> Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jing Zhang <zj.barak@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> --- linux-2.6.32/fs/ext4/mballoc.c 2009-12-03 11:51:22.000000000 +0800
> >> +++ ext4_mm_leak/mballoc3.c 2010-03-21 21:37:18.000000000 +0800
> >> @@ -2360,6 +2360,24 @@ err_freesgi:
> >> return -ENOMEM;
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static void ext4_mb_destroy_backend(struct super_block *sb)
> >> +{
> >> + ext4_group_t ngroups = ext4_get_groups_count(sb);
> >> + ext4_group_t i;
> >> + struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(sb);
> >> + int j;
> >> + int num_meta_group_infos = (ngroups + EXT4_DESC_PER_BLOCK(sb) -1)
> >> + >> EXT4_DESC_PER_BLOCK_BITS(sb);
> >> + for (i = 0; i < ngroups; i++)
> >> + kfree(ext4_get_group_info(sb, i));
> >> +
> >> + for (j = 0; j < num_meta_group_infos; j++)
> >> + kfree(sbi->s_group_info[j]);
> >> +
> >> + kfree(sbi->s_group_info);
> >> + iput(sbi->s_buddy_cache);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >
> > It would be better if this could be done by making ext4_mb_release()
> > more flexible, and then calling ext4_mb_release() if there is an error
> > setting up the data structures in ext4_mb_init().
> >
> > - Ted
> >
>
> Yeah, Ted, going through ext4_mb_release() is clearer.
>
> ---
>
> diff --git a/linux-2.6.32/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/ext4_mm_leak/mballoc3.c
> index bba1282..99ca2de 100644
> --- a/linux-2.6.32/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> +++ b/ext4_mm_leak/mballoc3.c
> @@ -2417,8 +2417,7 @@ int ext4_mb_init(struct super_block *sb, int
> needs_recovery)
>
> sbi->s_locality_groups = alloc_percpu(struct ext4_locality_group);
> if (sbi->s_locality_groups == NULL) {
> - kfree(sbi->s_mb_offsets);
> - kfree(sbi->s_mb_maxs);
> + ext4_mb_release(sb);
We may want to make sure that we can safely call ext4_mb_release that
early. what i would suggest is to move s_locality_group allocation
before ext4_mb_init. that makes error handling easy
> return -ENOMEM;
> }
> for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
> @@ -2511,7 +2510,8 @@ int ext4_mb_release(struct super_block *sb)
> atomic_read(&sbi->s_mb_discarded));
> }
>
> - free_percpu(sbi->s_locality_groups);
> + if (sbi->s_locality_groups)
> + free_percpu(sbi->s_locality_groups);
> if (sbi->s_proc)
> remove_proc_entry("mb_groups", sbi->s_proc);
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
-aneesh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
