Good catch, but could we make a common nfs4_free_stateowner() helper
called both from here and nfs4_put_stateowner() so we only have to do
the kfree() in that one place?
--b.
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 05:30:21PM +0800, Kinglong Mee wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Kinglong Mee <kinglongmee@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c | 10 +++++++---
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> index b1f84fc..e5e14fa 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
> @@ -3316,8 +3316,10 @@ alloc_init_open_stateowner(unsigned int strhashval, struct nfsd4_open *open,
> if (ret == NULL) {
> hash_openowner(oo, clp, strhashval);
> ret = oo;
> - } else
> + } else {
> + kfree(oo->oo_owner.so_owner.data);
> nfs4_free_openowner(&oo->oo_owner);
> + }
> spin_unlock(&clp->cl_lock);
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -5217,8 +5219,10 @@ alloc_init_lock_stateowner(unsigned int strhashval, struct nfs4_client *clp,
> list_add(&lo->lo_owner.so_strhash,
> &clp->cl_ownerstr_hashtbl[strhashval]);
> ret = lo;
> - } else
> - nfs4_free_lockowner(&lo->lo_owner);
> + } else {
> + kfree(lo->lo_owner.so_owner.data);
> + nfs4_free_openowner(&lo->lo_owner);
> + }
> spin_unlock(&clp->cl_lock);
> return ret;
> }
> --
> 2.4.3
--
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
