On 2019/12/4 2:54, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 12/3/19 11:52 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>> It's just a memory leak, but it's a regression in 4.2.
>>
>> Should we take it into 4.2?
>
> Sorry, I was on holiday and then jury service, so I missed any chance at
> getting this into -rc3. The memory leak only happens on failure, and
> you'd have to be pretty desperate to purposefully attempt to open a lot
> of NBD devices where you know you'll get a failure just to trigger
> enough of a leak to cause the OOM-killer to target qemu. So I'm fine if
> this is deferred to 5.0, and just cc's qemu-stable (now done).
>
> I'll queue this through my NBD tree for 5.0.
>
>>
>>
>> 29.11.2019 10:25, pannengy...@huawei.com wrote:
>>> From: PanNengyuan <pannengy...@huawei.com>
>
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Euler Robot <euler.ro...@huawei.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: PanNengyuan <pannengy...@huawei.com>
>
> I'm not one to tell you that your name is written incorrectly, but it
> does look odd to have a single word rather than a space between two
> capitalized portions. If that's really how you want your S-o-b and
> authorship to appear, I'm happy to preserve it; but you may want to
> consider updating your git settings, and posting a v4 with an updated
> spelling if you would prefer something different. (It is also
> acceptable to use UTF-8 characters; some people like listing an S-o-b in
> both native characters and a Westernized variant).
>
Thanks for your advice, I will update my git settings.
>>
>> May add:
>>
>> Fixes: 8f071c9db506e03ab
>
> Yes, information like that helps in deciding how long the problem has
> been present (in this case, it is indeed a regression added in 4.2, even
> if minor in nature).
>
ok, I will add it next time.
