On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 10:12 AM Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 04:05:30PM +0800, 余快 wrote: ... > > one line patch for this merge window? just fix the first double free > > issue for now. > > > > diff --git a/block/blk-mq-tag.c b/block/blk-mq-tag.c > > index d880c50629d6..1e0ccf19295a 100644 > > --- a/block/blk-mq-tag.c > > +++ b/block/blk-mq-tag.c > > @@ -622,6 +622,7 @@ int blk_mq_tag_update_depth(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > blk_mq_free_map_and_rqs(set, *tagsptr, hctx->queue_num); > > + hctx->queue->elevator->et->tags[hctx->queue_num]= new; > > *tagsptr = new; > > It is fine if this way can work, however old elevator->et may has lower > depth, then: > > - the above change cause et->tags overflow > > - meantime memory leak is caused in blk_mq_free_sched_tags() oops, looks I misunderstoodd nr_hw_queues as queue depth, so this single line patch should fix the double free issue. Thanks, Ming
