linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lightnvm: fix memory leak when submit fails

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 21 Jan 2021 14:28:46 +0100
From:   Javier González <javier@...igon.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Pan Bian <bianpan2016@....com>, Matias Bjorling <mb@...htnvm.io>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lightnvm: fix memory leak when submit fails

On 21.01.2021 05:47, Jens Axboe wrote:
>On 1/21/21 12:22 AM, Pan Bian wrote:
>> The allocated page is not released if error occurs in
>> nvm_submit_io_sync_raw(). __free_page() is moved ealier to avoid
>> possible memory leak issue.
>
>Applied, thanks.
>
>General question for Matias - is lightnvm maintained anymore at all, or
>should we remove it? The project seems dead from my pov, and I don't
>even remember anyone even reviewing fixes from other people.
>

At least from the pblk side, I have no objections to removing it. I test
briefly that pblk runs on new releases, but there are no new features or
known bug fixes coming in.

Current deployments - to the best of my knowledge - are forks, which are
not being retrofitted upstream.

For completeness, I get a number of questions and request primarily from
the academia. These people will probably accuse the lack of LightNVM. I
understand though that this is not an argument to keep it.

Javier