[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8D983423E7EDF846BB3056827B8CC5D15CFFD41D@corpmail1.na.ads.idt.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 19:00:42 +0000
From: "Bounine, Alexandre" <Alexandre.Bounine@....com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
Matt Porter <mporter@...nel.crashing.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [patch] rapidio: dereferencing an error pointer
On Thu, August 04, 2016 1:26 AM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> wrote:
> Subject: [patch] rapidio: dereferencing an error pointer
>
> If riocm_ch_alloc() fails then we end up dereferencing the error
> pointer.
>
Probably simply setting "new_ch = NULL" on the error path would fix the
issue, but making code simpler also helps. Thank you.
Acked.
> The problem is that we're not unwinding in the reverse order from how
> we allocate things so it gets confusing. I've changed this around so
> now "ch" is NULL when we are done with it after we call
> riocm_put_channel(). That way we can check if it's NULL and avoid
> calling riocm_put_channel() on it twice.
>
> I renamed err_nodev to err_put_new_ch so that it better reflects what
> the goto does.
>
> Then because we had flipping things around, it means we don't neeed to
> initialize the pointers to NULL and we can remove an if statement and
> pull things in an indent level.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c b/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c
> index cecc15a..3fa17ac 100644
> --- a/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c
> +++ b/drivers/rapidio/rio_cm.c
> @@ -1080,8 +1080,8 @@ static int riocm_send_ack(struct rio_channel *ch)
> static struct rio_channel *riocm_ch_accept(u16 ch_id, u16 *new_ch_id,
> long timeout)
> {
> - struct rio_channel *ch = NULL;
> - struct rio_channel *new_ch = NULL;
> + struct rio_channel *ch;
> + struct rio_channel *new_ch;
> struct conn_req *req;
> struct cm_peer *peer;
> int found = 0;
> @@ -1155,6 +1155,7 @@ static struct rio_channel *riocm_ch_accept(u16
> ch_id, u16 *new_ch_id,
>
> spin_unlock_bh(&ch->lock);
> riocm_put_channel(ch);
> + ch = NULL;
> kfree(req);
>
> down_read(&rdev_sem);
> @@ -1172,7 +1173,7 @@ static struct rio_channel *riocm_ch_accept(u16
> ch_id, u16 *new_ch_id,
> if (!found) {
> /* If peer device object not found, simply ignore the
> request */
> err = -ENODEV;
> - goto err_nodev;
> + goto err_put_new_ch;
> }
>
> new_ch->rdev = peer->rdev;
> @@ -1184,15 +1185,16 @@ static struct rio_channel *riocm_ch_accept(u16
> ch_id, u16 *new_ch_id,
>
> *new_ch_id = new_ch->id;
> return new_ch;
> +
> +err_put_new_ch:
> + spin_lock_bh(&idr_lock);
> + idr_remove(&ch_idr, new_ch->id);
> + spin_unlock_bh(&idr_lock);
> + riocm_put_channel(new_ch);
> +
> err_put:
> - riocm_put_channel(ch);
> -err_nodev:
> - if (new_ch) {
> - spin_lock_bh(&idr_lock);
> - idr_remove(&ch_idr, new_ch->id);
> - spin_unlock_bh(&idr_lock);
> - riocm_put_channel(new_ch);
> - }
> + if (ch)
> + riocm_put_channel(ch);
> *new_ch_id = 0;
> return ERR_PTR(err);
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists