> On 9 Feb 2022, at 03:56, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 10:06:13AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> The leak itself is clearly not something to worry about wrt memory pressure. >> We do read into tmp and free it in other places in the same function though >> (as >> you note above), so for code consistency alone this is worth doing IMO (and >> it >> reduces the risk of static analyzers flagging this). >> >> Unless objected to I will go ahead with getting this committed. > > Looks like you forgot to apply that?
No, but I was distracted by other things leaving this on the TODO list. It's been pushed now. -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
