[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <PH0PR11MB5611C4619889C5C45628CBF185EDA@PH0PR11MB5611.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2023 12:47:14 +0000
From: "Staikov, Andrii" <andrii.staikov@...el.com>
To: "Nelson, Shannon" <shannon.nelson@....com>, "Nguyen, Anthony L"
<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org"
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "Loktionov, Aleksandr" <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>, "Pucha,
HimasekharX Reddy" <himasekharx.reddy.pucha@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net 1/2] i40e: fix potential memory leaks in i40e_remove()
> Looping over all the VSIs makes some sense now that there are multiple VSIs being used by the PF, but why all the extra calls? It seems to me that i40e_vsi_release() already takes care of all this except for the "pf->vsi[i] = NULL".
Thank you for reviewing the patch. We have double-checked the required calls: i40e_vsi_free_q_vectors() and kfree() are not needed here.
Regards,
Staikov Andrii
Powered by blists - more mailing lists