[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e9674719-0c86-63be-04a3-ee98bd884901@samsung.com>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 11:13:24 +0200
From: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
To: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>,
Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Bad kfree of dma_parms in v5.7-rc5
Hi Tomi,
On 20.05.2020 11:00, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> Commit 9495b7e92f716ab2bd6814fab5e97ab4a39adfdd ("driver core:
> platform: Initialize dma_parms for platform devices") v5.7-rc5 causes
> at least some v4l2 platform drivers to break when freeing resources.
>
> E.g. drivers/media/platform/ti-vpe/cal.c uses
> vb2_dma_contig_set_max_seg_size() and
> vb2_dma_contig_clear_max_seg_size() to manage the dma_params, and
> similar pattern is seen in other drivers too.
>
> After 9495b7e92f716ab2, vb2_dma_contig_set_max_seg_size() will not
> allocate anything, but vb2_dma_contig_clear_max_seg_size() will still
> kfree the dma_params.
>
> I'm not sure what's the proper fix here. A flag somewhere to indicate
> that vb2_dma_contig_set_max_seg_size() did allocate, and thus
> vb2_dma_contig_clear_max_seg_size() must free?
>
> Or drop the kzalloc and kfree totally, if dma_params is now supposed
> to always be there?
Thanks for reporting this issue!
Once the mentioned commit has been merged, the code should assume that
the platform devices does have a struct dma_params allocated, so the
proper fix is to alloc dma_params only if the bus is not a platform bus:
if (!dev_is_platform(dev) && !dev->dma_parms) {
dev->dma_parms = kzalloc(sizeof(*dev->dma_parms), GFP_KERNEL);
same check for the free path.
Would you like to send a patch for that?
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Powered by blists - more mailing lists