[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAD-N9QX7A=Z4=bpjw63zCZ=KTTJTYP=n9g29Kp1d39DxgK2_Eg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 11:40:13 +0800
From: Dongliang Mu <mudongliangabcd@...il.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Samuel Iglesias Gonsalvez <siglesias@...lia.com>,
Jens Taprogge <jens.taprogge@...rogge.org>,
Lv Yunlong <lyl2019@...l.ustc.edu.cn>,
Aditya Srivastava <yashsri421@...il.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
industrypack-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ipack: tpci200: fix many double free issues in tpci200_pci_probe
On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 8:20 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 07:11:31PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote:
> > The function tpci200_register called by tpci200_install and
> > tpci200_unregister called by tpci200_uninstall are in pair. However,
> > tpci200_unregister has some cleanup operations not in the
> > tpci200_register. So the error handling code of tpci200_pci_probe has
> > many different double free issues.
> >
> > Fix this problem by moving those cleanup operations out of
> > tpci200_unregister, into tpci200_pci_remove and reverting
> > the previous commit 9272e5d0028d
> >
> > Reported-by: Dongliang Mu <mudongliangabcd@...il.com>
> > Fixes: 9272e5d0028d ("ipack/carriers/tpci200: Fix a double free in tpci200_pci_probe")
> > Signed-off-by: Dongliang Mu <mudongliangabcd@...il.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/ipack/carriers/tpci200.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++----------------
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> This needs to be applied to the tree now, and should not depend on your
> patch 1/3 here as it is a bugfix. Please redo this series and send 2,
> one to be merged for 5.14-final and to go to the stable kernels, and a
> separate "clean up things" series that can wait until 5.15-rc1.
No problem. I will send a separate fix.
BTW, how about the PATCH 3/3 in this series [1]? It does not depend on
PATCH 1/3, however, it does not include the fix to memleak, but also
moves the unregister function. Shall I send it separately?
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/7/21/370
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists