linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: fcoe: add missed kfree() in an error path

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]

Message-ID: <ec1e1405-7582-0709-f2a5-a8b91e45fa1a@web.de>
Date:   Thu, 9 Jul 2020 09:22:34 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Jing Xiangfeng <jingxiangfeng@...wei.com>,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
        "James E. J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Neerav Parikh <Neerav.Parikh@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: fcoe: add missed kfree() in an error path

>>> fcoe_fdmi_info() misses to call kfree() in an error path.
>>> Add the missed function call to fix it.
>>
>> I suggest to use an additional jump target for the completion
>> of the desired exception handling.
>>
>>
>> …
>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c
>>> @@ -830,6 +830,7 @@ static void fcoe_fdmi_info(struct fc_lport *lport, struct net_device *netdev)
>>>           if (rc) {
>>>               printk(KERN_INFO "fcoe: Failed to retrieve FDMI "
>>>                       "information from netdev.\n");
>>> +            kfree(fdmi);
>>>               return;
>>>           }
>>
>> -            return;
>> +            goto free_fdmi;
>>
>>
>> How do you think about to apply any further coding style adjustments?
>
> The local variable "fdmi" is invisible to the function.

I have got understanding difficulties for this information.
The function call “kfree(fdmi)” is already used at the end of this if branch.
Thus I propose to add a label there.

Do you notice any additional improvement possibilities for this software module?

Regards,
Markus