On 04/24/2014 07:49 PM, Al Viro wrote: > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:55:58PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 01:34:14PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: >> >>>> Why does that code bother with destroying/creating that sucker dynamically? >>>> Is there any point at all? >>> >>> I'm not sure about the dynamic allocation part, but I fear that if we just >>> switch to using static allocations it'll hide the underlying issue that >>> triggered this bug instead of fixing it. >> >> FWIW, slub.c variant of kmem_cache_destroy() is buggered - struct kobject >> embedded into struct kmem_cache, its ktype is slab_ktype, which has >> NULL ->release()... > > BTW, if your config has CONFIG_DEBUG_KOBJECT_RELEASE, that's exactly where > that warning comes from. Got broken by commit b7454a, > Author: Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri Oct 19 18:20:25 2012 +0400 > > mm/sl[au]b: Move slabinfo processing to slab_common.c > > We *do* need ->release(). Greg and guilty parties Cc'd... We actually had that conversation a long time ago, and Christoph has sent out a patch to fix that (http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg259431.html). I was assuming that it was merged upstream and went straight to blaming fs/ (and Greg's drivers/usb/ actually) without checking that first. Sorry! Could someone pretty please merge that patch? Specially since Greg acked it? Thanks, Sasha -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
