From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@sk.com>, <gourry@gourry.net>
Cc: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>,
<joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com>, <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
<ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com>, <david@redhat.com>,
<Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>, <kernel_team@skhynix.com>,
<honggyu.kim@sk.com>, <yunjeong.mun@sk.com>, <rakie.kim@sk.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] mm/mempolicy: Fix memory leaks in weighted interleave sysfs
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 14:21:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <67ec58c8c637_1d472949b@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250401090901.1050-2-rakie.kim@sk.com>
Rakie Kim wrote:
> Memory leaks occurred when removing sysfs attributes for weighted
> interleave. Improper kobject deallocation led to unreleased memory
> when initialization failed or when nodes were removed.
>
> This patch resolves the issue by replacing unnecessary `kfree()`
> calls with `kobject_put()`, ensuring proper cleanup and preventing
> memory leaks.
>
> By correctly using `kobject_put()`, the release function now
> properly deallocates memory without causing resource leaks,
> thereby improving system stability.
>
> Fixes: dce41f5ae253 ("mm/mempolicy: implement the sysfs-based weighted_interleave interface")
> Signed-off-by: Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@sk.com>
> Signed-off-by: Honggyu Kim <honggyu.kim@sk.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yunjeong Mun <yunjeong.mun@sk.com>
> Reviewed-by: Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net>
> ---
> mm/mempolicy.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
> index bbaadbeeb291..5950d5d5b85e 100644
> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
> @@ -3448,7 +3448,9 @@ static void sysfs_wi_release(struct kobject *wi_kobj)
>
> for (i = 0; i < nr_node_ids; i++)
> sysfs_wi_node_release(node_attrs[i], wi_kobj);
> - kobject_put(wi_kobj);
> +
> + kfree(node_attrs);
> + kfree(wi_kobj);
> }
>
> static const struct kobj_type wi_ktype = {
> @@ -3494,15 +3496,22 @@ static int add_weighted_interleave_group(struct kobject *root_kobj)
> struct kobject *wi_kobj;
> int nid, err;
>
> - wi_kobj = kzalloc(sizeof(struct kobject), GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!wi_kobj)
> + node_attrs = kcalloc(nr_node_ids, sizeof(struct iw_node_attr *),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!node_attrs)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> + wi_kobj = kzalloc(sizeof(struct kobject), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!wi_kobj) {
> + err = -ENOMEM;
> + goto node_out;
> + }
> +
> err = kobject_init_and_add(wi_kobj, &wi_ktype, root_kobj,
> "weighted_interleave");
It would be nice if this could take advantage of scope-based cleanup to
avoid the new gotos. It would need a new:
DEFINE_FREE(kobject_put, struct kobject *, if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(_T)) kobject_put(_T))
...and a wrapper around kobject_init_and_add() to support auto cleanup:
struct kobject *kobject_init_and_add_or_errptr(struct kobject *kobj)
{
int err = kobject_init_and_add(kobj...);
if (err)
return ERR_PTR(err);
return kobj;
}
With those then you could do:
struct kobject *wi_kobj __free(kfree) = kzalloc(sizeof(struct kobject), GFP_KERNEL);
struct kobject *kobj __free(kobject_put) = kobject_init_and_add_or_errptr(no_free_ptr(wi_kobj), ...)
Otherwise, the patch does look good to me as is, but it seems like an
opportunity for further cleanups that might also help other
kobject_init_and_add() code paths.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-01 21:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-01 9:08 [PATCH v4 0/3] Enhance sysfs handling for memory hotplug in weighted interleave Rakie Kim
2025-04-01 9:08 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] mm/mempolicy: Fix memory leaks in weighted interleave sysfs Rakie Kim
2025-04-01 21:21 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2025-04-02 1:29 ` Rakie Kim
2025-04-01 9:08 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] mm/mempolicy: Support dynamic sysfs updates for weighted interleave Rakie Kim
2025-04-01 9:08 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] mm/mempolicy: Support memory hotplug in " Rakie Kim
2025-04-01 20:32 ` Gregory Price
2025-04-02 1:28 ` Rakie Kim
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=67ec58c8c637_1d472949b@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch \
--to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=gourry@gourry.net \
--cc=honggyu.kim@sk.com \
--cc=joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel_team@skhynix.com \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rakie.kim@sk.com \
--cc=ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=yunjeong.mun@sk.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox