linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: board: drop refcount in success case

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 Jun 2018 10:37:09 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: board: drop refcount in success case

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 08:53:19PM +0200, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
>  The call to of_find_compatible_node() returns irqc_node with refcount
> incremented thus it must be explicitly decremented here after it was
> checked for non-NULL.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>
> Fixes: commit 72ee8626eeb1 ("staging: board: Add support for translating hwirq to virq numbers")
> ---
> 
> Problem located with an experimental coccinelle script
> 
> Patch was compile-tested with: x86_64_defconfig + STAGING=y, STAGING_BOARD=y
> 
> Patch is against 4.18-rc1 (localversion-next is next-20180618)
> 
>  drivers/staging/board/board.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/board/board.c b/drivers/staging/board/board.c
> index cb6feb3..8ee48e5 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/board/board.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/board/board.c
> @@ -64,12 +64,13 @@ int __init board_staging_gic_setup_xlate(const char *gic_match,
>  	irqc_node = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, gic_match);
>  
>  	WARN_ON(!irqc_node);
>  	if (!irqc_node)
>  		return -ENOENT;
>  
> +	of_node_put(irqc_node);

I don't feel like this is the right thing...  We should keep the
reference until we're done with it.  Which apparently is never?

But I don't know the code at all so I could be wrong.

regards,
dan carpenter