linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf ksymbol: fix memory leak: decrease refcount of map and dso

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAP-5=fVxHUnwGoRypMjCsPSh_yo5PB8Hzbkx5ArA5b0=7S-67g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 3 Jun 2021 21:26:40 -0700
From:   Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To:     Riccardo Mancini <rickyman7@...il.com>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Tommi Rantala <tommi.t.rantala@...ia.com>,
        linux-perf-users <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf ksymbol: fix memory leak: decrease refcount of map
 and dso

On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 4:15 PM Riccardo Mancini <rickyman7@...il.com> wrote:
>
> ASan reported a memory leak of BPF-related ksymbols map and dso.
> The leak is caused by refcount never reaching 0, due to missing
> __put calls in the function machine__process_ksymbol_register.
> Once the dso is inserted in map, dso__put should be called,
> since map__new2 has increased its refcount to 2.
> The same thing applies for the map when it's inserted into the
> rb-tree in maps (maps__insert increases the refcount to 2).
>
> $ sudo ./perf record -- sleep 5
> [ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
> [ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.025 MB perf.data (8 samples) ]
>
> =================================================================
> ==297735==ERROR: LeakSanitizer: detected memory leaks
>
> Direct leak of 6992 byte(s) in 19 object(s) allocated from:
>     #0 0x4f43c7 in calloc (/home/user/linux/tools/perf/perf+0x4f43c7)
>     #1 0x8e4e53 in map__new2 /home/user/linux/tools/perf/util/map.c:216:20
>     #2 0x8cf68c in machine__process_ksymbol_register /home/user/linux/tools/perf/util/machine.c:778:10
>     [...]
>
> Indirect leak of 8702 byte(s) in 19 object(s) allocated from:
>     #0 0x4f43c7 in calloc (/home/user/linux/tools/perf/perf+0x4f43c7)
>     #1 0x8728d7 in dso__new_id /home/user/linux/tools/perf/util/dso.c:1256:20
>     #2 0x872015 in dso__new /home/user/linux/tools/perf/util/dso.c:1295:9
>     #3 0x8cf623 in machine__process_ksymbol_register /home/user/linux/tools/perf/util/machine.c:774:21
>     [...]
>
> Indirect leak of 1520 byte(s) in 19 object(s) allocated from:
>     #0 0x4f43c7 in calloc (/home/user/linux/tools/perf/perf+0x4f43c7)
>     #1 0x87b3da in symbol__new /home/user/linux/tools/perf/util/symbol.c:269:23
>     #2 0x888954 in map__process_kallsym_symbol /home/user/linux/tools/perf/util/symbol.c:710:8
>     [...]
>
> Indirect leak of 1406 byte(s) in 19 object(s) allocated from:
>     #0 0x4f43c7 in calloc (/home/user/linux/tools/perf/perf+0x4f43c7)
>     #1 0x87b3da in symbol__new /home/user/linux/tools/perf/util/symbol.c:269:23
>     #2 0x8cfbd8 in machine__process_ksymbol_register /home/user/linux/tools/perf/util/machine.c:803:8
>     [...]
>
> Signed-off-by: Riccardo Mancini <rickyman7@...il.com>
> ---
>  tools/perf/util/machine.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/machine.c b/tools/perf/util/machine.c
> index 3ff4936a15a42..d5937778875e1 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/machine.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/machine.c
> @@ -776,6 +776,7 @@ static int machine__process_ksymbol_register(struct machine *machine,
>                 if (dso) {
>                         dso->kernel = DSO_SPACE__KERNEL;
>                         map = map__new2(0, dso);
> +                       dso__put(dso);

Will this cause 2 puts if the map allocation fails? Perhaps this
should be "if (map) dso__put(dso);".

Thanks,
Ian

>                 }
>
>                 if (!dso || !map) {
> @@ -792,6 +793,7 @@ static int machine__process_ksymbol_register(struct machine *machine,
>                 map->start = event->ksymbol.addr;
>                 map->end = map->start + event->ksymbol.len;
>                 maps__insert(&machine->kmaps, map);
> +               map__put(map);
>                 dso__set_loaded(dso);
>
>                 if (is_bpf_image(event->ksymbol.name)) {
> --
> 2.31.1
>