[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6881c322-8fbb-422f-bdbb-392a83d0b326@web.de>
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 13:23:47 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Justin Chen <justin.chen@...adcom.com>,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: bcmasp: fix memory leak when bringing down if
Can it be nicer to use the word “interface” instead of “if”
in the summary phrase?
> When bringing down the TX rings we flush the rings but forget to
> reclaimed the flushed packets. This lead to a memory leak since we
> do not free the dma mapped buffers. …
I find this change description improvable.
* How do you think about to avoid typos?
* Would another imperative wording be more desirable?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists