[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200212175151.GA1872825@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 09:51:51 -0800
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.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 Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 11:01:52AM +0200, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> On 11.2.2020 18.13, Greg KH wrote:
> > 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?
> >
>
> Yes, please
Now done, thanks.
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists