> On 9 Feb 2022, at 03:56, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 10:06:13AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> The leak itself is clearly not something to worry about wrt memory pressure.
>> We do read into tmp and free it in other places in the same function though (as
>> you note above), so for code consistency alone this is worth doing IMO (and it
>> reduces the risk of static analyzers flagging this).
>>
>> Unless objected to I will go ahead with getting this committed.
>
> Looks like you forgot to apply that?
No, but I was distracted by other things leaving this on the TODO list. It's
been pushed now.
--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
