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  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:   Thu, 22 Jul 2021 14:16:55 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Dongliang Mu <mudongliangabcd@...il.com>
Cc:     Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
        Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soundwire: stream: add s_rt into slave_rt_list before
 sdw_config_stream

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 06:56:11PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> The commit 48f17f96a817 ("soundwire: stream: fix memory leak in stream
> config error path") fixes the memory leak by implicitly freeing the s_rt
> object. However, this fixing style is not very good.
> 
> The better fix is to move list_add_tail before sdw_config_stream and
> revert the previous commit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dongliang Mu <mudongliangabcd@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/soundwire/stream.c | 14 +++-----------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/stream.c b/drivers/soundwire/stream.c
> index 1a18308f4ef4..66a4ce4f923f 100644
> --- a/drivers/soundwire/stream.c
> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/stream.c
> @@ -1373,19 +1373,11 @@ int sdw_stream_add_slave(struct sdw_slave *slave,
>  		goto stream_error;
>  	}
>  
> +	list_add_tail(&s_rt->m_rt_node, &m_rt->slave_rt_list);
> +
>  	ret = sdw_config_stream(&slave->dev, stream, stream_config, true);

There some sanity checks on the stream inside sdw_config_stream() so
that's probably why we didn't add it until later.  (I don't know the
code well, but that's what I would suspect from a glance).

regards,
dan carpenter

Powered by blists - more mailing lists