linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/9] misc: sram: fix enabled clock leak on error path

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:	Tue, 19 May 2015 16:11:42 +0300
From:	Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@...tor.com>
To:	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
CC:	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/9] misc: sram: fix enabled clock leak on error path

Hi Philipp,

On 19.05.2015 13:41, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> Am Montag, den 18.05.2015, 22:08 +0300 schrieb Vladimir Zapolskiy:
>> If devm_gen_pool_create() fails, the previously enabled sram->clk is
>> not disabled on probe() exit.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@...tor.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/misc/sram.c | 9 +++++----
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/misc/sram.c b/drivers/misc/sram.c
>> index eeaaf5f..b44a423 100644
>> --- a/drivers/misc/sram.c
>> +++ b/drivers/misc/sram.c
>> @@ -90,16 +90,17 @@ static int sram_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>  	if (!sram)
>>  		return -ENOMEM;
>>  
>> +	sram->pool = devm_gen_pool_create(&pdev->dev,
>> +					  ilog2(SRAM_GRANULARITY), -1);
>> +	if (!sram->pool)
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>>  	sram->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
>>  	if (IS_ERR(sram->clk))
>>  		sram->clk = NULL;
>>  	else
>>  		clk_prepare_enable(sram->clk);
> 
> Here you move sram->clk around, and later in patch 7 it gets moved
> again. To me it looks like the two should be squashed together.

I agree with you, instead of moving sram->pool up it is better to place
sram->clk right at the end of probe(), in other words this patch can be
safely merged with patch 7 and the series becomes a bit shorter.

Thank you for the finding, I'm going to resend the change, please let me
know your opinion about "%pa" vs "0x%llx", if it is needed to be changed
or not.

>>  
>> -	sram->pool = devm_gen_pool_create(&pdev->dev, ilog2(SRAM_GRANULARITY), -1);
>> -	if (!sram->pool)
>> -		return -ENOMEM;
>> -
>>  	/*
>>  	 * We need an additional block to mark the end of the memory region
>>  	 * after the reserved blocks from the dt are processed.
> 
> regards
> Philipp
> 

--
With best wishes,
Vladimir
--
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/