Re: [PATCH 2/3] md/bitmap: Delete an unnecessary check before the function call "kfree"

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 03 Feb 2015 11:19:58 +0100 walter harms <wharms@xxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> 
> Am 03.02.2015 10:07, schrieb NeilBrown:
> > On Tue, 03 Feb 2015 09:48:01 +0100 walter harms <wharms@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 02.02.2015 20:46, schrieb NeilBrown:
> >>> On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 16:20:42 +0100 SF Markus Elfring
> >>> <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 15:10:57 +0100
> >>>>
> >>>> The kfree() function tests whether its argument is NULL and then
> >>>> returns immediately. Thus the test around the call is not needed.
> >>>>
> >>>> * This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
> >>>>
> >>>> * Let us also move an assignment for the variable "pages" to the place
> >>>>   directly before it is really needed for a loop.
> >>>>
> >>>> * Let us also move another kfree() call into a block which should belong
> >>>>   to a previous check for the variable "bp".
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  drivers/md/bitmap.c | 10 +++++-----
> >>>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/md/bitmap.c b/drivers/md/bitmap.c
> >>>> index da3604e..47d72df 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/md/bitmap.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/md/bitmap.c
> >>>> @@ -1586,15 +1586,15 @@ static void bitmap_free(struct bitmap *bitmap)
> >>>>  	bitmap_file_unmap(&bitmap->storage);
> >>>>  
> >>>>  	bp = bitmap->counts.bp;
> >>>> -	pages = bitmap->counts.pages;
> >>>>  
> >>>>  	/* free all allocated memory */
> >>>> -
> >>>> -	if (bp) /* deallocate the page memory */
> >>>> +	if (bp) { /* deallocate the page memory */
> >>>> +		pages = bitmap->counts.pages;
> >>>>  		for (k = 0; k < pages; k++)
> >>>> -			if (bp[k].map && !bp[k].hijacked)
> >>>> +			if (!bp[k].hijacked)
> >>>>  				kfree(bp[k].map);
> >>>> -	kfree(bp);
> >>>> +		kfree(bp);
> >>>> +	}
> >>>>  	kfree(bitmap);
> >>>>  }
> >>>>  
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>  I'm somewhat amused that you removed a test for one kfree, but imposed a
> >>>  test on another.  I realised the second test was already there, but why not
> >>>  just:
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/md/bitmap.c b/drivers/md/bitmap.c
> >>> index da3604e73e8a..ad13b2e1bf1f 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/md/bitmap.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/md/bitmap.c
> >>> @@ -1592,7 +1592,7 @@ static void bitmap_free(struct bitmap *bitmap)
> >>>  
> >>>  	if (bp) /* deallocate the page memory */
> >>>  		for (k = 0; k < pages; k++)
> >>> -			if (bp[k].map && !bp[k].hijacked)
> >>> +			if (!bp[k].hijacked)
> >>>  				kfree(bp[k].map);
> >>>  	kfree(bp);
> >>>  	kfree(bitmap);
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> It makes the intention of the patch much clearer.
> >>>
> >>> I'd probably prefer to leave the code as it is.  I don't think either patch
> >>> is really an improvement in readability, and readability trumps performance
> >>> in places like this.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> hello Neil,
> >> just for my curiosity.
> >> is it possible that a bp[k] exists but bp[k].hijacked is 0 ?
> >> if that case: kfree(bp) would free an object in use.
> >> otherwise hijacked seems useless here as it is possible to free
> >> everything.
> >>
> >> re,
> >>  wh
> > 
> > If .hijacked is 0, the .map is a pointer (that would need to be freed) or is
> > NULL.
> > If .hijacked is 1, then .map has been re-tasked as 2 16-bit counters.  They
> > are probably bother zero at this point, but I think it is safer to completely
> > skip the 'free' if 'hijacked' is set as in that case 'map' isn't a pointer.
> > 
> 
> It seems i was not clear enough, sorry about that.
> 
> we have a loop to kfree(bp[k].map), thats fine how it is done.
> 
> I am wondering about the kfree(bp) after the loop.
> if bp[k].map is not freed for what ever reason how can it be freed later
> after a kfree(bp) ?
> 
> what is what i am missing ? Is there a hidden copy ?

If bp[k].map is a pointer, it will be freed.
If bp[k].map is not a pointer (because it has been hijacked), then there is
nothing to free.

So after the loop, all bp[k].maps that were allocated will have been freed.

Does that help?

NeilBrown


> 
> re,
>  wh
> 
> 
> 

Attachment: pgpebwV0NbnBV.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux