| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4BBE1F01.5000800@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 20:22:57 +0200
From: Florian Tobias Schandinat <FlorianSchandinat@....de>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Harald Welte <laforge@...monks.org>,
JosephChan@....com.tw, ScottFang@...tech.com.cn,
Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@...top.org>,
linux-fbdev-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] [FB] viafb: Fix various resource leaks during module_init()
Jonathan Corbet schrieb:
> From: Harald Welte <laforge@...monks.org>
>
> The current code executed from module_init() in viafb does not have
> proper error checking and [partial] resoure release paths in case
> an error happens half way through driver initialization.
>
> This patch adresses the most obvious of those issues, such as a
> leftover i2c bus if module_init (and thus module load) fails.
>
> [jc: fixed merge conflicts]
> Signed-off-by: Harald Welte <HaraldWelte@...tech.com>
> ---
> drivers/video/via/viafbdev.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> 1 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/video/via/viafbdev.c b/drivers/video/via/viafbdev.c
> index 3028e7d..91bfe6d 100644
> --- a/drivers/video/via/viafbdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/video/via/viafbdev.c
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> /*
> - * Copyright 1998-2008 VIA Technologies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
> + * Copyright 1998-2009 VIA Technologies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
> * Copyright 2001-2008 S3 Graphics, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
>
> * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> @@ -1847,7 +1847,7 @@ static int __devinit via_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> const struct pci_device_id *ent)
> {
> u32 default_xres, default_yres;
> - int vmode_index;
> + int rc, vmode_index;
> u32 viafb_par_length;
>
> DEBUG_MSG(KERN_INFO "VIAFB PCI Probe!!\n");
> @@ -1862,7 +1862,7 @@ static int __devinit via_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> &pdev->dev);
> if (!viafbinfo) {
> printk(KERN_ERR"Could not allocate memory for viafb_info.\n");
> - return -ENODEV;
> + return -ENOMEM;
> }
>
> viaparinfo = (struct viafb_par *)viafbinfo->par;
> @@ -1886,7 +1886,9 @@ static int __devinit via_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> viafb_dual_fb = 0;
>
> /* Set up I2C bus stuff */
> - viafb_create_i2c_bus(viaparinfo);
> + rc = viafb_create_i2c_bus(viaparinfo);
> + if (rc)
> + goto out_fb_release;
>
> viafb_init_chip_info(pdev, ent);
> viaparinfo->fbmem = pci_resource_start(pdev, 0);
> @@ -1897,7 +1899,8 @@ static int __devinit via_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> viaparinfo->memsize);
> if (!viafbinfo->screen_base) {
> printk(KERN_INFO "ioremap failed\n");
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + rc = -EIO;
I don't know whether this is right (changing the return code) as Andrew
recommend a while ago:
"It should return -ENOMEM rather than -1, but that's minor."
So I did and now I wonder which one is correct?
> + goto out_delete_i2c;
> }
>
> viafbinfo->fix.mmio_start = pci_resource_start(pdev, 1);
> @@ -1988,8 +1991,7 @@ static int __devinit via_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> if (!viafbinfo1) {
> printk(KERN_ERR
> "allocate the second framebuffer struct error\n");
> - framebuffer_release(viafbinfo);
> - return -ENOMEM;
rc = -ENOMEM;
is missing?
> + goto out_delete_i2c;
> }
> viaparinfo1 = viafbinfo1->par;
> memcpy(viaparinfo1, viaparinfo, viafb_par_length);
> @@ -2044,21 +2046,26 @@ static int __devinit via_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> viaparinfo->depth = fb_get_color_depth(&viafbinfo->var,
> &viafbinfo->fix);
> default_var.activate = FB_ACTIVATE_NOW;
> - fb_alloc_cmap(&viafbinfo->cmap, 256, 0);
> + rc = fb_alloc_cmap(&viafbinfo->cmap, 256, 0);
> + if (rc)
> + goto out_fb1_release;
>
> if (viafb_dual_fb && (viafb_primary_dev == LCD_Device)
> && (viaparinfo->chip_info->gfx_chip_name == UNICHROME_CLE266)) {
> - if (register_framebuffer(viafbinfo1) < 0)
> - return -EINVAL;
> + rc = register_framebuffer(viafbinfo1);
> + if (rc)
> + goto out_dealloc_cmap;
> }
> - if (register_framebuffer(viafbinfo) < 0)
> - return -EINVAL;
> + rc = register_framebuffer(viafbinfo);
> + if (rc)
> + goto out_fb1_unreg_lcd_cle266;
>
> if (viafb_dual_fb && ((viafb_primary_dev != LCD_Device)
> || (viaparinfo->chip_info->gfx_chip_name !=
> UNICHROME_CLE266))) {
> - if (register_framebuffer(viafbinfo1) < 0)
> - return -EINVAL;
> + rc = register_framebuffer(viafbinfo1);
> + if (rc)
> + goto out_fb_unreg;
> }
> DEBUG_MSG(KERN_INFO "fb%d: %s frame buffer device %dx%d-%dbpp\n",
> viafbinfo->node, viafbinfo->fix.id, default_var.xres,
> @@ -2067,6 +2074,23 @@ static int __devinit via_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> viafb_init_proc(&viaparinfo->shared->proc_entry);
> viafb_init_dac(IGA2);
> return 0;
> +
> +out_fb_unreg:
> + unregister_framebuffer(viafbinfo);
> +out_fb1_unreg_lcd_cle266:
> + if (viafb_dual_fb && (viafb_primary_dev == LCD_Device)
> + && (viaparinfo->chip_info->gfx_chip_name == UNICHROME_CLE266))
> + unregister_framebuffer(viafbinfo1);
> +out_dealloc_cmap:
> + fb_dealloc_cmap(&viafbinfo->cmap);
> +out_fb1_release:
> + if (viafbinfo1)
> + framebuffer_release(viafbinfo1);
> +out_delete_i2c:
> + viafb_delete_i2c_buss(viaparinfo);
> +out_fb_release:
> + framebuffer_release(viafbinfo);
> + return rc;
> }
>
> static void __devexit via_pci_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)
Otherwise it looks okay.
Thanks,
Florian Tobias Schandinat
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists