Hi, reviewed, and made sure by the means of a coccinelle script that there are no other instances of any kmem_cache allocated data being kfreed. dave On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 04:37:39PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote: > Since commit dc89e9824464e91fa0b06267864ceabe3186fd8b, we've changed > to use a specific slab for alocation of free_space items. > > Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <lizf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c > index 11d2e9c..13c29b1 100644 > --- a/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/free-space-cache.c > @@ -2301,7 +2301,7 @@ int btrfs_trim_block_group(struct btrfs_block_group_cache *block_group, > start = entry->offset; > bytes = min(entry->bytes, end - start); > unlink_free_space(block_group, entry); > - kfree(entry); > + kmem_cache_free(btrfs_free_space_cachep, entry); > } > > spin_unlock(&block_group->tree_lock); > -- 1.7.3.1 > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
