[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200211161316.GA1914687@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 08:13:16 -0800
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Cc: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>,
pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de, mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, krzk@...nel.org,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH v2] xhci: Fix memory leak when caching protocol
extended capability PSI tables
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 04:12:40PM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> Hi Mathias,
>
> On 11.02.2020 16:01, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> > xhci driver assumed that xHC controllers have at most one custom
> > supported speed table (PSI) for all usb 3.x ports.
> > Memory was allocated for one PSI table under the xhci hub structure.
> >
> > Turns out this is not the case, some controllers have a separate
> > "supported protocol capability" entry with a PSI table for each port.
> > This means each usb3 roothub port can in theory support different custom
> > speeds.
> >
> > To solve this, cache all supported protocol capabilities with their PSI
> > tables in an array, and add pointers to the xhci port structure so that
> > every port points to its capability entry in the array.
> >
> > When creating the SuperSpeedPlus USB Device Capability BOS descriptor
> > for the xhci USB 3.1 roothub we for now will use only data from the
> > first USB 3.1 capable protocol capability entry in the array.
> > This could be improved later, this patch focuses resolving
> > the memory leak.
> >
> > Reported-by: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
> > Reported-by: Sajja Venkateswara Rao <VenkateswaraRao.Sajja@....com>
> > Fixes: 47189098f8be ("xhci: parse xhci protocol speed ID list for usb 3.1 usage")
> > Cc: stable <stable@...r.kernel.org> # v4.4+
> > Signed-off-by: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>
>
> Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Nice!
Should I revert the first and then apply this?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists