[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1108200007520.31857@swampdragon.chaosbits.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 00:21:22 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>
To: Anton Altaparmakov <anton@...era.com>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ntfs-dev@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] make ntfs_free() NULL safe
On Fri, 19 Aug 2011, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 19 Aug 2011, at 22:30, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > Here's a small series of patches that make it safe to call ntfs_free()
> > with a NULL pointer and reaps some bennefits from that.
> >
> > The first patch in the series simply makes ntfs_free() safe to call with a
> > NULL pointer. This fits with many other kernel freeing functions, that are
> > generally safe to call with NULL pointers.
> >
> > The second patch adds some documentation to ntfs_free() similar to what's
> > already provided for the allocation functions. ntfs_free() is fairly
> > simple so you could argue that such documentation is not really needed,
> > but I say it's still nice to have if for no other reason than
> > completeness.
> >
> > The third patch removes a number of tests for NULL pointers before calls
> > to ntfs_free() that patch 1 make redundant.
>
> Patches look fine. Feel free to add my
>
> Acked-by: Anton Altaparmakov <anton@...era.com>
>
Thank you.
> and to send them to Linus for inclusion…
>
I think I'll wait a bit before doing that. Hopefully some maintainer will
pick them up and push them. But if that doesn't happen I'll make sure to
re-sumbit them myself and point them higher up the hierarchy (with your
ACK attached) :-)
> > This whole things came about because Coverity Prevent spotted that in
> > fs/ntfs/runlist.c on line 967 we call ntfs_runlists_merge() which frees
> > its second argument and we then explicitly free that argument via
> > ntfs_free() again on line 970. This patch series also makes that a non
> > issue.
>
> Ah but Coverity Prevent is incorrect in its spotting!
>
> Have a look yourself!
>
> ntfs_runlists_merge() _ONLY_ frees its second argument if it returns success. If it returns error it does _NOT_ free its second argument!
>
On second inspection I believe you are right.
> And line 970 is _ONLY_ executed if ntfs_runlists_merge() returned error, i.e. in the case that the second argument was _NOT_ freed. If the argument was freed, ntfs_runlists_merge() would have returned success, and then line 970 would never have been reached…
>
> So I am afraid this is a bug in Coverity Prevent rather than in NTFS. (-:
>
I'll make a note in prevent that this is a false positive.
I still believe the 3 patches make sense though, regardless of this.
--
Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net> http://www.chaosbits.net/
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists