Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 10:00:35 -0700 From: hiren panchasara <hiren@strugglingcoder.info> To: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Sean Bruno <sbruno@freebsd.org>, erj@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: E1000 mbuf leaks Message-ID: <20150730170035.GE39365@strugglingcoder.info> In-Reply-To: <55B60FC8.2020003@selasky.org> References: <55B60FC8.2020003@selasky.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--+ts6NCQ4mrNQIV8p Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 07/27/15 at 01:02P, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > Hi, >=20 > I'm currently doing some busdma work, and possibly stepped over some=20 > driver bugs. When "bus_dmamap_load_mbuf_sg()" returns ENOMEM the mbuf=20 > chain is not freed. Is there some magic in "bus_dmamap_load_mbuf_sg()"=20 > for that error code or is there a possible memory leak in all E1000=20 > drivers? See attached patch. Can you open a phabricator review if this hasn't been reviewed/committed yet? cheers, Hiren --+ts6NCQ4mrNQIV8p Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (FreeBSD) iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJVulgyXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRBNEUyMEZBMUQ4Nzg4RjNGMTdFNjZGMDI4 QjkyNTBFMTU2M0VERkU1AAoJEIuSUOFWPt/lTMAH/3BAU5raOMXt5iisRT0cMb4f M0wCVHWiTSJd9PvCfKHN7ArKKl3Wwnob85g2VeIdopzgtq0kAdc2HbbxTS2ElzeD 8Dsh1CyzIwSoOyEYG2+UbG6a4jJWXdoTZub1M675fbzxXFMXlLQJhIY0ehlg3T0Z ELFFMD0/ESrO5fuJSkGhi2BX7ofgIftTgf5PJ6qrKlmExBl6cYRgC+Qd0V+o8rro Rm1dA4UMVW4Hp370iKXH3h4q4rfSzNfUeq6/HjHYkvQXR+GtgjJ4/QhdaOVfR1W1 eDbPU5dyMaoZQUvbQFf/bX9D7ZwW1Do8urjk7yWH/mjx05Sbv+k515TnjHm3bKE= =Hg0Y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --+ts6NCQ4mrNQIV8p--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150730170035.GE39365>