[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241029153624.GA210796@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 12:36:24 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@...dia.com>
Cc: kevin.tian@...el.com, will@...nel.org, joro@...tes.org,
suravee.suthikulpanit@....com, robin.murphy@....com,
dwmw2@...radead.org, baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com, shuah@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, eric.auger@...hat.com,
jean-philippe@...aro.org, mdf@...nel.org, mshavit@...gle.com,
shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com, smostafa@...gle.com,
yi.l.liu@...el.com, aik@....com, zhangfei.gao@...aro.org,
patches@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/13] iommufd/viommu: Add IOMMU_VIOMMU_ALLOC ioctl
On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 11:54:36AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 04:49:44PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > +void iommufd_viommu_destroy(struct iommufd_object *obj)
> > +{
> > + struct iommufd_viommu *viommu =
> > + container_of(obj, struct iommufd_viommu, obj);
> > +
> > + if (viommu->ops && viommu->ops->free)
> > + viommu->ops->free(viommu);
>
> Ops can't be null and free can't be null, that would mean there is a
> memory leak.
Actually, it is just named wrong, it should be called destroy like
this op, it doesn't free any memory..
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists