linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions

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:	Thu, 27 Aug 2015 07:01:26 +0530
From:	Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1994@...il.com>
To:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:	Javi Merino <javi.merino@....com>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
	Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] thermal: cpu_cooling: Remove usage of devm functions

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> On 26-08-15, 14:09, Javi Merino wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 01:51:58PM +0100, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> > On 26-08-15, 13:47, Javi Merino wrote:
>> > > I missed this because I wasn't CCed :(  Thankfully, I'll be in
>> > > MAINTAINERS for this soon.
>> >
>> > Yeah, I need to resend that patch soon :)
>> >
>> > > > -               devm_kfree(&cdev->device, load_cpu);
>> > >
>> > > This introduces a memory leak.  Keep the kfree() here, you can't drop
>> > > it.  Cheers,
>> > > Javi
>> > >
>> > > > -       }
>> > > > -
>> > > >         *power = static_power + dynamic_power;
>> > > >         return 0;
>
> So, the change I suggested on V1 removed this as well :) and Vaishali
> missed it completely.

Yes. I missed the point that kfree was called at 2 places previously.
Would you like me to send v3 with changes having just new label with
'goto' at both of these places or you would like to apply v1 of the patch?

>> > > > +
>> > > > +free:
>> > > > +       kfree(load_cpu);
>> >
>> > Wouldn't this make that work ?
>>
>> Nope, you're not reaching that code path from there.  Removing the
>> "return 0" would work, but I don't like it, since we would be calling
>> kfree() all the time, even when the trace is not enabled.  I'd rather
>> leave the kfree() where it is.
>
> Hmm..
>
> --
> viresh



-- 
Vaishali
--
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/