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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20180402063255.GC4714@vireshk-i7> Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 12:02:55 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> To: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@...com>, Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Zumeng Chen <zumeng.chen@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: ti-cpufreq: Fix couple of minor issues in probe() On 26-03-18, 16:52, Suman Anna wrote: > Commit 05829d9431df ("cpufreq: ti-cpufreq: kfree opp_data when > failure") has fixed a memory leak in the failure path, however > kmemleak still keeps reporting a leak even on successful probes. > This is a false-positive and is mostly a result of the opp_data I don't agree to this reasoning for this particular patch. The code is just fine and kmemleak is something that requires a fix. > variable not being stored anywhere in the probe function. The > patch also returned a positive value on the get_cpu_device() > failure instead of a negative value. Maybe that could have been fixed in a separate patch, cc'ing stable kernels as well. > unreferenced object 0xecae4d80 (size 64): > comm "swapper/0", pid 1, jiffies 4294937673 (age 154.420s) > hex dump (first 32 bytes): > 10 40 d9 ee 74 b7 db ee 00 24 ac ec 20 a3 ea c0 .@.......$.. ... > 00 26 ac ec 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 .&.............. > backtrace: > [<ec080d62>] platform_drv_probe+0x50/0xac > [<cbde8566>] driver_probe_device+0x24c/0x330 > [<a5818eb4>] bus_for_each_drv+0x54/0xb8 > [<2c6f7021>] __device_attach+0xcc/0x13c > [<a04478a2>] bus_probe_device+0x88/0x90 > [<b322c963>] device_add+0x38c/0x5b4 > [<6f1af99b>] platform_device_add+0x100/0x220 > [<cef42bca>] platform_device_register_full+0xf0/0x104 > [<4d492439>] ti_cpufreq_init+0x44/0x6c > [<81222e89>] do_one_initcall+0x48/0x190 > [<3bebf42a>] kernel_init_freeable+0x1f4/0x2b8 > [<230ad7df>] kernel_init+0x8/0x110 > [<43a165c3>] ret_from_fork+0x14/0x20 > [< (null)>] (null) > [<87288797>] 0xffffffff > > Fix both issues by replacing the previous logic by using the devres > managed API for allocating the opp_data variable, and simplifying > the get_cpu_device() failure return path. > > Fixes: 05829d9431df ("cpufreq: ti-cpufreq: kfree opp_data when failure") > Cc: Zumeng Chen <zumeng.chen@...il.com> > Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com> > --- > drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c | 7 ++----- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c > index a099b7bf74cd..7d353a21935b 100644 > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c > @@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ static int ti_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > if (!match) > return -ENODEV; > > - opp_data = kzalloc(sizeof(*opp_data), GFP_KERNEL); > + opp_data = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*opp_data), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!opp_data) > return -ENOMEM; > > @@ -226,8 +226,7 @@ static int ti_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > opp_data->cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(0); > if (!opp_data->cpu_dev) { > pr_err("%s: Failed to get device for CPU0\n", __func__); > - ret = ENODEV; > - goto free_opp_data; > + return -ENODEV; > } > > opp_data->opp_node = dev_pm_opp_of_get_opp_desc_node(opp_data->cpu_dev); > @@ -285,8 +284,6 @@ static int ti_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > fail_put_node: > of_node_put(opp_data->opp_node); > -free_opp_data: > - kfree(opp_data); > > return ret; > } I am fine with the diff though, as that makes sense. So maybe do this ? - send separate patch for ENODEV thing - and another patch to move to devres with a different reason than fixing false positive. -- viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists