Hi-
On Nov 22, 2010, at 7:40 AM, Wengang Wang wrote:
> nlmclnt_proc() is neither releasing nlm_rqst nor dropping the ref on nlm_host.
> Do the release work though I am not sure if it can really hit the situation.
Based on casual code review, the only case where this is a possibility is the "out_unlock" label in nlmclnt_lock(). Otherwise, this patch introduces a double release in other cases, doesn't it?
Is there a reproducer that can demonstrate a leak?
> Signed-off-by: Wengang Wang <wen.gang.wang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/lockd/clntproc.c | 4 +++-
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/lockd/clntproc.c b/fs/lockd/clntproc.c
> index 332c54c..ec9f0f5 100644
> --- a/fs/lockd/clntproc.c
> +++ b/fs/lockd/clntproc.c
> @@ -173,8 +173,10 @@ int nlmclnt_proc(struct nlm_host *host, int cmd, struct file_lock *fl)
> status = nlmclnt_unlock(call, fl);
> } else if (IS_GETLK(cmd))
> status = nlmclnt_test(call, fl);
> - else
> + else {
> + nlm_release_call(call);
> status = -EINVAL;
> + }
> fl->fl_ops->fl_release_private(fl);
> fl->fl_ops = NULL;
--
Chuck Lever
chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
