linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] cciss: fix regression in procfs display fw version, obsoletes previous patch 2 of 2

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20081016231736.GA7876@x200.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 17 Oct 2008 03:17:36 +0400
From:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:	"Miller, Mike (OS Dev)" <Mike.Miller@...com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cciss: fix regression in procfs display fw version,
	obsoletes previous patch 2 of 2

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:56:58PM +0000, Miller, Mike (OS Dev) wrote:
> > > > +     return_code = sendcmd_withirq(CISS_INQUIRY, i, inq_buff,
> > > > > +             sizeof(InquiryData_struct), 0, 0 ,0, TYPE_CMD);
> > > > > +     if (return_code == IO_OK) {
> > > > > +             hba[i]->firm_ver[0] = inq_buff->data_byte[32];
> > > > > +             hba[i]->firm_ver[1] = inq_buff->data_byte[33];
> > > > > +             hba[i]->firm_ver[2] = inq_buff->data_byte[34];
> > > > > +             hba[i]->firm_ver[3] = inq_buff->data_byte[35];
> > > > > +     } else {         /* send command failed */
> > > > > +             printk(KERN_WARNING "cciss: unable to
> > > > determine firmware"
> > > > > +                     " version of controller\n");
> > > > > +     }
> > > > > +
> > > > >       cciss_procinit(i);
> > > > >
> > > > >       hba[i]->cciss_max_sectors = 2048;
> > >
> > > Sorry, in too much of a hurry. I'll fix (again).
> >
> > And inq_buff is leaked, if I'm not missing simething.
> >
> Sorry, Alexy, I can't see the leak. Is it in the failure case?

Where "inq_buff" is freed?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/