linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mailbox: zynqmp-ipi-mailbox: Add of_node

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]

Message-ID: <c0be80c9-16ef-fe03-ae3b-a7d3d1a2ede8@xilinx.com>
Date:   Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:21:34 +0200
From:   Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
To:     Nishka Dasgupta <nishkadg.linux@...il.com>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        jassisinghbrar@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mailbox: zynqmp-ipi-mailbox: Add of_node_put() before
 goto

On 31. 07. 19 15:06, Nishka Dasgupta wrote:
> On 31/07/19 2:01 PM, Michal Simek wrote:
>> On 09. 07. 19 19:28, Nishka Dasgupta wrote:
>>> Each iteration of for_each_available_child_of_node puts the previous
>>> node, but in the case of a goto from the middle of the loop, there is
>>> no put, thus causing a memory leak. Hence add an of_node_put before the
>>> goto.
>>> Issue found with Coccinelle.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nishka Dasgupta <nishkadg.linux@...il.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi-mailbox.c | 1 +
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi-mailbox.c
>>> b/drivers/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi-mailbox.c
>>> index 86887c9a349a..bd80d4c10ec2 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi-mailbox.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi-mailbox.c
>>> @@ -661,6 +661,7 @@ static int zynqmp_ipi_probe(struct
>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>>           if (ret) {
>>>               dev_err(dev, "failed to probe subdev.\n");
>>>               ret = -EINVAL;
>>> +            of_node_put(nc);
>>>               goto free_mbox_dev;
>>>           }
>>>           mbox++;
>>>
>>
>> Patch is good but when you are saying that this was found by Coccinelle
>> then it should be added as script to kernel to detect it.
> 
> This particular patch was suggested by a script I did not write myself;
> someone else wrote it and sent it to me. How should I proceed in this case?

You can ask him to submit it to kernel.
Or you can take it, keep his authorship and send it to:

./scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f scripts/coccinelle/
Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr> (supporter:COCCINELLE/Semantic
Patches (SmPL))
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr> (supporter:COCCINELLE/Semantic
Patches (SmPL))
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr> (supporter:COCCINELLE/Semantic
Patches (SmPL))
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net> (supporter:COCCINELLE/Semantic
Patches (SmPL))
cocci@...teme.lip6.fr (moderated list:COCCINELLE/Semantic Patches (SmPL))
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org (open list)

Thanks,
Michal