On 7/1/20 7:31 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 12:24:17PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> Hi, >> >> There's no upstream variant of this, as that would require backporting >> all the io-wq changes from 5.5 and on. Hence I made a one-off that >> ensures that we don't leak memory if we have async work items that >> need active cancelation (like socket IO). >> >> Can we get this queued up for 5.4? I've tested it and the original >> reporter has as well. > > I've added the previous paragraph which explains why there is no > upstream version of this into the commit message and queued it for 5.4, > thank you! Perfect, thanks Sasha! -- Jens Axboe
