[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0cd0d259-e806-effd-5e44-fccd13842697@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 18:58:36 +0800
From: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@...wei.com>
To: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>, <peterz@...radead.org>,
<mingo@...hat.com>, <acme@...nel.org>, <mark.rutland@....com>,
<alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, <jolsa@...hat.com>,
<namhyung@...nel.org>, <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
<lukemujica@...gle.com>, <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
<yuzenghui@...wei.com>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <hushiyuan@...wei.com>,
<linfeilong@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf jevents: Fix resource leak in process_mapfile()
On 2019/10/16 18:40, John Garry wrote:
> On 16/10/2019 08:47, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
>> There are memory leaks and file descriptor resource leaks in
>> process_mapfile().
>>
>> Fix this by adding free() and fclose() on the error paths.
>>
>> Fixes: 80eeb67fe577 ("perf jevents: Program to convert JSON file")
>> Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@...wei.com>
>> ---
>> tools/perf/pmu-events/jevents.c | 9 +++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/pmu-events/jevents.c b/tools/perf/pmu-events/jevents.c
>> index e2837260ca4d..6e60d4cff592 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/pmu-events/jevents.c
>> +++ b/tools/perf/pmu-events/jevents.c
>> @@ -758,6 +758,7 @@ static int process_mapfile(FILE *outfp, char *fpath)
>> char *line, *p;
>> int line_num;
>> char *tblname;
>> + int ret = 0;
>>
>> pr_info("%s: Processing mapfile %s\n", prog, fpath);
>>
>> @@ -769,6 +770,7 @@ static int process_mapfile(FILE *outfp, char *fpath)
>> if (!mapfp) {
>> pr_info("%s: Error %s opening %s\n", prog, strerror(errno),
>> fpath);
>> + free(line);
>> return -1;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -795,7 +797,8 @@ static int process_mapfile(FILE *outfp, char *fpath)
>> /* TODO Deal with lines longer than 16K */
>> pr_info("%s: Mapfile %s: line %d too long, aborting\n",
>> prog, fpath, line_num);
>> - return -1;
>> + ret = -1;
>> + goto out;
>
> There's a subtle change of behaviour here, i.e. now calling print_mapping_table_suffix(), but I don't think that it makes any difference.
>
yes, I know that "goto out" will run print_mapping_table_suffix(outfp), because the error path before is done like this.
so I think it should be use "goto out" to run run print_mapping_table_suffix(outfp).
> However, does outfp remain open also in this case:
>
Because it has a comment that "Make build fail", so I am not handle the outfp, only modify the process_mapfile() function.
> main(int argc, char *argv[])
> {
> ...
>
> if (process_mapfile(eventsfp, mapfile)) {
> pr_info("%s: Error processing mapfile %s\n", prog, mapfile);
> /* Make build fail */
> return 1;
> }
>
> return 0;
>
> empty_map:
> fclose(eventsfp);
> ...
> }
>
> I think that this code works on the basis that the program exits on any sort of error and releases resources automatically. Having said that, it is a good practice to tidy up.
>
I agree with you, when program exits, it will releases resources automatically. It's just to make the program clearer and more correct.
> John
>
>> }
>> line[strlen(line)-1] = '\0';
>>
>> @@ -825,7 +828,9 @@ static int process_mapfile(FILE *outfp, char *fpath)
>>
>> out:
>> print_mapping_table_suffix(outfp);
>> - return 0;
>> + fclose(mapfp);
>> + free(line);
>> + return ret;
>> }
>>
>> /*
>>
>
>
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists