Hi Feng, On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:57:07 +0800, Feng Tang wrote: > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 08:17:03AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >> Em Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 04:20:53PM +0800, Feng Tang escreveu: >> > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:11:21 +0900 >> > Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org> wrote: >> > > Ditto. Plus it might leak previous input_name. >> > >> > Nice catch, will check the return value of "strdup". >> > >> > For input_name mem leak, in some cases the input_name can't be called >> > with free(), like those got from parse "-i" option. In case the old >> > input_name is got from malloc through strdup, I think it's not a big >> > issue given that buffer will be freed any way when the application exit. >> >> I think this is a matter of discipline, leaking is bad, kernel or >> userspace, why special case it? >> > > I see, then we need make sure all "input_name" point to a malloced buffer, > here is a initial debug patch will only touch the annotate/report/script > cmds, pls review and more suggestions are welcomed:
Well, how about adding a flag like "input_name_alloced" and checking it before new allocation? This way we can avoid needless strdup when runtime switching is not used. Thanks, Namhyung -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/