On 2019/4/30 10:20 下午, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 4/30/19 8:05 AM, Coly Li wrote:
>> On 2019/4/30 10:02 下午, Coly Li wrote:
>>> Commit 95f18c9d1310 ("bcache: avoid potential memleak of list of
>>> journal_replay(s) in the CACHE_SYNC branch of run_cache_set") forgets
>>> to remove the original define of LIST_HEAD(journal), which makes
>>> the change no take effect. This patch removes redundant variable
>>> LIST_HEAD(journal) from run_cache_set(), to make Shenghui's fix
>>> working.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Juha Aatrokoski <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: Shenghui Wang <[email protected]>
>>> Signed-off-by: Coly Li <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/md/bcache/super.c | 1 -
>>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/super.c b/drivers/md/bcache/super.c
>>> index 0ffe9acee9d8..1b63ac876169 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/md/bcache/super.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/super.c
>>> @@ -1800,7 +1800,6 @@ static int run_cache_set(struct cache_set *c)
>>> set_gc_sectors(c);
>>>
>>> if (CACHE_SYNC(&c->sb)) {
>>> - LIST_HEAD(journal);
>>> struct bkey *k;
>>> struct jset *j;
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Hi Jens,
>>
>> Please take this fix for the Linux v5.2 bcache series. It fixes a
>> problem from
>> [PATCH 18/18] bcache: avoid potential memleak of list of
>> journal_replay(s) in the CACHE_SYNC branch of run_cache_set
>> which is already in your for-next branch.
>>
>> Thanks to Juha for cache this bug, and thank you in advance for taking
>> care of this.
>
> Applied, but please add Fixes: lines patches like that, it's not enough
> to simply mention it in the commit message.
>
I just re-send a V2 patch with adding the Fixes: line, thanks for taking
care of this.
--
Coly Li
