linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c: add missing test

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

Date:	Mon, 22 Aug 2011 16:36:16 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
To:	Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>
Cc:	Robert Love <robert.w.love@...el.com>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@...allels.com>,
	devel@...n-fcoe.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c: add missing test

On Mon, 22 Aug 2011, Jesper Juhl wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Aug 2011, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> > From: Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
> > 
> > The initializations of both fcoe_nport_scsi_transport and
> > fcoe_vport_scsi_transport can fail, so test both of them.
> > 
> > The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows:
> > (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
> > 
> > // <smpl>
> > @r@
> > identifier x,y,f!={PTR_ERR,ERR_PTR,ERR_CAST};
> > statement S;
> > @@
> > 
> > x = f(...);
> > (
> > if (\(x == NULL\|IS_ERR(x)\)) S
> > |
> > *if (\(y == NULL\|IS_ERR(y)\))
> >  { ... when != x
> >    return ...; }
> > )
> > // </smpl>
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
> > 
> > ---
> >  drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c |    2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c b/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c
> > index ba710e3..921b636 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c
> > @@ -1096,7 +1096,7 @@ static int __init fcoe_if_init(void)
> >  	fcoe_vport_scsi_transport =
> >  		fc_attach_transport(&fcoe_vport_fc_functions);
> >  
> > -	if (!fcoe_nport_scsi_transport) {
> > +	if (!fcoe_nport_scsi_transport || !fcoe_vport_scsi_transport) {
> >  		printk(KERN_ERR "fcoe: Failed to attach to the FC transport\n");
> >  		return -ENODEV;
> >  	}
> > 
> 
> I only took a quick look, so I may have overlooked something, so bear with 
> me.
> 
> fc_attach_transport() allocates memory with kzalloc. If either call fails 
> the other may have succeeded and we'll leak the memory allocated to one of 
> them.
> 
> Shouldn't we be kfree()'ing the two variables before the 'return -ENODEV'?

It seems reasonable.

julia
--
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/