From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753351Ab2IWAPa (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Sep 2012 20:15:30 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:22967 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753144Ab2IWAP1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Sep 2012 20:15:27 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,469,1344236400"; d="scan'208";a="225350900" Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 08:15:22 +0800 From: Fengguang Wu To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Shaun Ruffell , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Shaohui Xie , Kim Phillips , linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, Mauro Carvalho Chehab Subject: Re: Linux 3.6-rc6 Message-ID: <20120923001522.GA8383@localhost> References: <20120922005905.GA8335@digium.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 11:57:23AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Shaun Ruffell wrote: > > > > I posted patches [1,2,3] that resolve the issue for me. Shaohui Xie > > also hit the issue and posted a slightly different patch [4]. The > > patches are currently waiting for Mauro, who I understand is > > catching up since returning from San Diego, to check them out. > > > > [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=134764595921752&w=2 > > [2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=134764594721747&w=2 > > [3] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=134764597921761&w=2 > > [4] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=134753579818528&w=2 > > That first patch needs a sign-off from you, since you are passing on > somebody elses patch. > > Looking at that patch, the patch seems to be a memory leak (?) leaking > the "channels" allocation, along with fixing an odd and incorrect Yes. > kfree (and access) of mci->csrows[i]. If that is correct, please write Right. > a proper changelog. The current changelog for that thing is totally > pointless, and doesn't actually explain what the patch *does*. Sorry I'll send the fix with more complete changelog in a standalone patch for review. > I'd also like some ack's from people, and I'd love to know which > commit introduced the problem(s). If this problem is new to 3.6, I > want to know what caused it, and if it is *not* new, then the thing > needs to be marked for stable. Please? It's a new bug to 3.6. Thanks, Fengguang