[dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH 2/3] test/hash: free allocated memory

[David Marchand]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:59 AM Honnappa Nagarahalli <
Honnappa.Nagarahalli at arm.com> wrote:

>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 5:25 AM Honnappa Nagarahalli <
> honnappa.nagarahalli at arm.com<mailto:honnappa.nagarahalli at arm.com>> wrote:
> Free allocated memory.
>
> Fixes: 3f9aab961ed3 ("test/hash: check lock-free extendable bucket")
> Cc: stable at dpdk.org<mailto:stable at dpdk.org>
>
> Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli at arm.com<mailto:
> honnappa.nagarahalli at arm.com>>
> Reviewed-by: Dharmik Thakkar <dharmik.thakkar at arm.com<mailto:
> dharmik.thakkar at arm.com>>
> ---
>  app/test/test_hash_readwrite_lf.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite_lf.c
> b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite_lf.c
> index e9aca6ff4..e92d1065b 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_hash_readwrite_lf.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_hash_readwrite_lf.c
> @@ -1431,6 +1431,8 @@ test_hash_readwrite_lf_main(void)
>         rte_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.keys_ks);
>         rte_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.keys_absent);
>         rte_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.keys_shift_path);
> +       rte_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.keys_ext_bkt);
> +       rte_free(tbl_rwc_test_param.keys_ks_extbkt);
>         rte_free(scanned_bkts);
>         return 0;
>  }
> --
> 2.17.1
>
>
> I inspected this test a little more, I can see other leaks.
> - generate_keys(), on error, we are leaking tbl_rwc_test_param.h.
> - test_rwc_reader(), we are leaking pos.
> - test_hash_readwrite_lf_main(), we are leaking
> tbl_rwc_test_param.keys_non_shift_path
> [Honnappa] Thanks for the review. I fixed these and few more in V2.
>

Still missed pos in some err path.
Comment incoming.


> Looking at your patch 1, I would prefer you reset tbl_rwc_test_param field
> per field to NULL once the rte_free() is called.
> It would then be easier for you to track the remaining leaks (and patch 1
> disappears).
> [Honnappa] This can be considered as initialization code. I have left this
> as it is.
>

Ok, I won't insist.

-- 
David Marchand