Re: [patch net] net: sched: fix memleak for chain zero

2017-09-11 Thread Cong Wang
On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 7:03 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Sat, Sep 09, 2017 at 08:46:42PM CEST, xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com wrote: >>On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 7:18 PM, David Miller wrote: >>> >>> This doesn't apply cleanly any more, please respin. >>> >> >>Sigh, you applied this patch despite of strong obje

Re: [patch net] net: sched: fix memleak for chain zero

2017-09-10 Thread Jiri Pirko
Sat, Sep 09, 2017 at 08:46:42PM CEST, xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com wrote: >On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 7:18 PM, David Miller wrote: >> >> This doesn't apply cleanly any more, please respin. >> > >Sigh, you applied this patch despite of strong objections from me. > >I seriously doubt your tastes now, David.

Re: [patch net] net: sched: fix memleak for chain zero

2017-09-09 Thread Cong Wang
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 7:18 PM, David Miller wrote: > > This doesn't apply cleanly any more, please respin. > Sigh, you applied this patch despite of strong objections from me. I seriously doubt your tastes now, David. Fine, this code does not deserve a good taste at all, let bugs stay there. G

Re: [patch net] net: sched: fix memleak for chain zero

2017-09-07 Thread David Miller
From: Jiri Pirko Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 13:14:19 +0200 > From: Jiri Pirko > > There's a memleak happening for chain 0. The thing is, chain 0 needs to > be always present, not created on demand. Therefore tcf_block_get upon > creation of block calls the tcf_chain_create function directly. The >

Re: [patch net] net: sched: fix memleak for chain zero

2017-09-06 Thread Jiri Pirko
Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 01:37:59AM CEST, xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com wrote: >On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 07:40:02PM CEST, xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com wrote: >>>On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:14 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: From: Jiri Pirko There's a memleak

Re: [patch net] net: sched: fix memleak for chain zero

2017-09-06 Thread Cong Wang
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 07:40:02PM CEST, xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com wrote: >>On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:14 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> From: Jiri Pirko >>> >>> There's a memleak happening for chain 0. The thing is, chain 0 needs to >>> be always present

Re: [patch net] net: sched: fix memleak for chain zero

2017-09-06 Thread Jiri Pirko
Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 07:40:02PM CEST, xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com wrote: >On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:14 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> From: Jiri Pirko >> >> There's a memleak happening for chain 0. The thing is, chain 0 needs to >> be always present, not created on demand. Therefore tcf_block_get upon >> c

Re: [patch net] net: sched: fix memleak for chain zero

2017-09-06 Thread Cong Wang
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:14 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > From: Jiri Pirko > > There's a memleak happening for chain 0. The thing is, chain 0 needs to > be always present, not created on demand. Therefore tcf_block_get upon > creation of block calls the tcf_chain_create function directly. The > chain i

Re: [patch net] net: sched: fix memleak for chain zero

2017-09-06 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 13:14:19 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > From: Jiri Pirko > > There's a memleak happening for chain 0. The thing is, chain 0 needs to > be always present, not created on demand. Therefore tcf_block_get upon > creation of block calls the tcf_chain_create function directly. The > cha

[patch net] net: sched: fix memleak for chain zero

2017-09-06 Thread Jiri Pirko
From: Jiri Pirko There's a memleak happening for chain 0. The thing is, chain 0 needs to be always present, not created on demand. Therefore tcf_block_get upon creation of block calls the tcf_chain_create function directly. The chain is created with refcnt == 1, which is not correct in this case