On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 09:32 +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2007 schrieb Rusty Russell:
> > + vbr = mempool_alloc(vblk->pool, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > + if (!vbr)
> > + goto stop;
> [...]
> > + BUG_ON(req->nr_phys_segments > ARRAY_SIZE(vblk->sg));
> > + vbr->req = req;
> > + if (!do_req(q, vblk, vbr))
> > + goto stop;
> [...]
> > +stop:
> > + /* Queue full? Wait. */
> > + blk_stop_queue(q);
> > + mempool_free(vbr, vblk->pool);
>
>
> Hmm, can mempool_free really handle NULL as its first argument? (first goto).
Good point. Any objections to fixing that?
Cheers,
Rusty.
===
Christian Borntraeger points out that mempool_free() doesn't noop when
handed NULL. This is inconsistent with the other free-like functions
in the kernel.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff -r a306f0a8de5e mm/mempool.c
--- a/mm/mempool.c Fri Jul 06 10:28:39 2007 +1000
+++ b/mm/mempool.c Fri Jul 06 10:29:40 2007 +1000
@@ -263,6 +263,9 @@ void mempool_free(void *element, mempool
{
unsigned long flags;
+ if (unlikely(element == NULL))
+ return;
+
smp_mb();
if (pool->curr_nr < pool->min_nr) {
spin_lock_irqsave(&pool->lock, flags);
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
