* [PATCH v5] workqueue: Remove unnecessary kfree() call in rcu_free_wq()
@ 2020-05-28 1:29 qiang.zhang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: qiang.zhang @ 2020-05-28 1:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tj; +Cc: jiangshanlai, markus.elfring, linux-kernel
From: Zhang Qiang <qiang.zhang@windriver.com>
The data structure member "wq->rescuer" was reset to a null pointer
in one if branch. It was passed to a call of the function "kfree"
in the callback function "rcu_free_wq" (which was eventually executed).
The function "kfree" does not perform more meaningful data processing
for a passed null pointer (besides immediately returning from such a call).
Thus delete this function call which became unnecessary with the referenced
software update.
Fixes: def98c84b6cd ("workqueue: Fix spurious sanity check failures in destroy_workqueue()")
Co-developed-by: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Zhang Qiang <qiang.zhang@windriver.com>
---
v1->v2->v3->v4->v5:
Modify weakly submitted information.
kernel/workqueue.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 891ccad5f271..a2451cdcd503 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -3491,7 +3491,6 @@ static void rcu_free_wq(struct rcu_head *rcu)
else
free_workqueue_attrs(wq->unbound_attrs);
- kfree(wq->rescuer);
kfree(wq);
}
--
2.24.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v5] workqueue: Remove unnecessary kfree() call in rcu_free_wq()
2020-05-27 7:57 qiang.zhang
2020-05-27 8:20 ` Markus Elfring
@ 2020-05-27 13:52 ` Tejun Heo
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tejun Heo @ 2020-05-27 13:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: qiang.zhang; +Cc: jiangshanlai, markus.elfring, linux-kernel
On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:57:15PM +0800, qiang.zhang@windriver.com wrote:
> From: Zhang Qiang <qiang.zhang@windriver.com>
>
> The data structure member "wq->rescuer" was reset to a null pointer
> in one if branch. It was passed to a call of the function "kfree"
> in the callback function "rcu_free_wq" (which was eventually executed).
> The function "kfree" does not perform more meaningful data processing
> for a passed null pointer (besides immediately returning from such a call).
> Thus delete this function call which became unnecessary with the referenced
> software update.
>
> Fixes: def98c84b6cd ("workqueue: Fix spurious sanity check failures in destroy_workqueue()")
>
> Suggested-by: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Qiang <qiang.zhang@windriver.com>
Applied to wq/for-5.8.
Thanks.
--
tejun
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v5] workqueue: Remove unnecessary kfree() call in rcu_free_wq()
2020-05-27 7:57 qiang.zhang
@ 2020-05-27 8:20 ` Markus Elfring
2020-05-27 13:52 ` Tejun Heo
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Markus Elfring @ 2020-05-27 8:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zhang Qiang, Tejun Heo, Lai Jiangshan; +Cc: linux-kernel, kernel-janitors
> Thus delete this function call which became unnecessary with the referenced
> software update.
…
> Suggested-by: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Would the tag “Co-developed-by” be more appropriate according to the patch review
to achieve a more pleasing commit message?
> v1->v2->v3->v4->v5:
> Modify weakly submitted information.
Now I wonder about your wording choice “weakly”.
Regards,
Markus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v5] workqueue: Remove unnecessary kfree() call in rcu_free_wq()
@ 2020-05-27 7:57 qiang.zhang
2020-05-27 8:20 ` Markus Elfring
2020-05-27 13:52 ` Tejun Heo
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: qiang.zhang @ 2020-05-27 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tj; +Cc: jiangshanlai, markus.elfring, linux-kernel
From: Zhang Qiang <qiang.zhang@windriver.com>
The data structure member "wq->rescuer" was reset to a null pointer
in one if branch. It was passed to a call of the function "kfree"
in the callback function "rcu_free_wq" (which was eventually executed).
The function "kfree" does not perform more meaningful data processing
for a passed null pointer (besides immediately returning from such a call).
Thus delete this function call which became unnecessary with the referenced
software update.
Fixes: def98c84b6cd ("workqueue: Fix spurious sanity check failures in destroy_workqueue()")
Suggested-by: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Zhang Qiang <qiang.zhang@windriver.com>
---
v1->v2->v3->v4->v5:
Modify weakly submitted information.
kernel/workqueue.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index 891ccad5f271..a2451cdcd503 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -3491,7 +3491,6 @@ static void rcu_free_wq(struct rcu_head *rcu)
else
free_workqueue_attrs(wq->unbound_attrs);
- kfree(wq->rescuer);
kfree(wq);
}
--
2.24.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-05-28 1:21 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-05-28 1:29 [PATCH v5] workqueue: Remove unnecessary kfree() call in rcu_free_wq() qiang.zhang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-05-27 7:57 qiang.zhang
2020-05-27 8:20 ` Markus Elfring
2020-05-27 13:52 ` Tejun Heo
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).