> From: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> > Sent: Friday, August 16, 2024 6:00 PM > To: Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org> > > On Fri, 16 Aug 2024 at 16:50, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> > wrote: > > We shouldn't need to explicitly call cpu_address_space_destroy() from > > a target-specific unrealize anyway: we can do it all from the base > > class (and I think this would fix some leaks in current code for > > targets that hot-unplug, though I should check that). Otherwise you > > need to duplicate all the logic for figuring out which address spaces > > we created in realize, which is fragile and not necessary when all we > > want to do is "delete every address space the CPU object has" > > and we want to do that for every target architecture always. > > I have a patch to do this now, but I need to test it a bit more and confirm > (or > disprove) my hypothesis that we're currently leaking memory on existing > architectures with vCPU hot-unplug before I send it out.
I think you are referring to this patch? https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20230918160257.30127-9-phi...@linaro.org/ > > -- PMM