linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] net/sonic: Fix some resource leaks in error handling paths

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:   Sun, 10 May 2020 18:25:36 +1000 (AEST)
From:   Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
cc:     Christophe Jaillet <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/sonic: Fix some resource leaks in error handling
 paths

On Sun, 10 May 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:

> Christophe Jaillet proposed to complete the exception handling also for this
> function implementation.
> I find that such a software correction is qualified for this tag.
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=e99332e7b4cda6e60f5b5916cf9943a79dbef902#n183
> 
> Corresponding consequences can vary then according to the change 
> management of involved developers.
> 

Makes sense.

> > I think 'undo_probe1' is both descriptive and consistent with commit 
> > 10e3cc180e64 ("net/sonic: Fix a resource leak in an error handling 
> > path in 'jazz_sonic_probe()'").
> 
> I can agree to this view (in principle).
> 
> By the way:
> The referenced commit contains the tag “Fixes”.
> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1231354/
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200427061803.53857-1-christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr/
> 

Right, I'd forgotten that. Do you know when these bugs were introduced?

> > Your suggestion, 'free_dma' is also good.
> 
> Thanks for your positive feedback.
> 
> 
> > But coming up with good alternatives is easy.
> 
> But the change acceptance can occasionally become harder.
> 

The path to patch acceptance often takes surprising turns.

> 
> > If every good alternative would be considered there would be no 
> > obvious way to get a patch merged.
> 
> I imagine that some alternatives can result in preferable solutions, 
> can't they?

Naming goto labels is just painting another bikeshed. Yes, some 
alternatives are preferable but it takes too long to identify them and 
finding consensus is unlikely anyway, as it's a matter of taste.