[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150516070955.GA2429@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 09:09:55 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: 8351/1: perf: fix memory leak on return
* Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com> wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>
> Recent commit 3b8786ff7a1b31645ae2c26a2ec32dbd42ac1094
> ("ARM: 8352/1: perf: Fix the pmu node name in warning message")
> introduced a memory leak of irqs on the "Don't bother with PPIs"
> return path. This was picked up by static analysis by cppcheck:
>
> [arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_cpu.c:315]: (error) Memory leak: irqs
>
> simpele fix is to free irqs when returning.
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_cpu.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_cpu.c b/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_cpu.c
> index 213919b..9e5b2a5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_cpu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_cpu.c
> @@ -311,8 +311,10 @@ static int of_pmu_irq_cfg(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> /* Don't bother with PPIs; they're already affine */
> irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> - if (irq >= 0 && irq_is_percpu(irq))
> + if (irq >= 0 && irq_is_percpu(irq)) {
> + kfree(irqs);
> return 0;
> + }
>
> for (i = 0; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) {
> struct device_node *dn;
So returning from the middle of a function isn't very clean.
Also, why do we return 0 in an error case?
Furthermore, this function already has a (partially hidden) error
cleanup path:
if (i == pdev->num_resources)
cpu_pmu->irq_affinity = irqs;
else
kfree(irqs);
So this code should use proper goto driven cleanup. That's faster and
cleaner, and is less likely to result in bugs like the above.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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