On 04/24/2014 11:31 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > 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? Ping? -- 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
