From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 24 May 2001 22:38:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 24 May 2001 22:38:40 -0400 Received: from csl.Stanford.EDU ([171.64.66.149]:64733 "EHLO csl.Stanford.EDU") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 24 May 2001 22:38:21 -0400 From: Dawson Engler Message-Id: <200105250238.TAA00788@csl.Stanford.EDU> Subject: Re: [CHECKER] error path memory leaks in 2.4.4 and 2.4.4-ac8 To: dwmw2@infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 19:38:14 -0700 (PDT) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <10347.990741765@redhat.com> from "David Woodhouse" at May 24, 2001 11:02:45 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > These are all now either fixed or obsoleted in my tree, and I will send a > patch to Linus shortly. Thankyou. Good deal. Thanks for letting us know! > Do you find it useful to get a response such as this? Are you keeping track > of the bugs you find? (Or is it simply reassuring to confirm that someone's > paying attention? :) It's definitely useful, since it lets us keep tabs on what types of bugs people actually fix ;-) The tool keeps track of the bugs/false positives we find, so that it can say when we find something new. > I believe we can make that a short. Arjan? Is the general way to fix these too-large stack vars to heap allocate them? Or is it preferable to put a "static" in front of them, if the routine is non-reentrant? Dawson