[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1602241200580.28838@vshiva-Udesk>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 12:05:32 -0800 (PST)
From: Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...el.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
cc: Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...el.com>,
Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hpa@...or.com,
mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, ravi.v.shankar@...el.com,
tony.luck@...el.com, fenghua.yu@...el.com,
kanaka.d.juvva@...el.com, h.peter.anvin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] x86/mbm: Intel Memory B/W Monitoring enumeration
and init
On Wed, 24 Feb 2016, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Feb 2016, Vikas Shivappa wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Feb 2016, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> You really should register the notifier _AFTER_ registering the pmu. That
>>> needs to be fixed anyway, because the existing code leaks the notifier AND
>>> memory in case perf_pmu_register fails.
>>
>> Correct, Will fix the notifier leak
>
> It's not only a notifier leak. The existing code also leaks memory. Please fix
> that before adding the new stuff in a seperate patch.
ok..Makes sense. will send the notifier and memory leak fix in seperate patch as
its a existing cqm issue.
I had added a kfree(str) in the end for the memory leak fix in the current
patch.
out:
cpu_notifier_register_done();
if (ret) {
mbm_enabled = false;
cqm_enabled = false;
kfree(str);
}
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists