linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH linux-next v2 1/3] platform/x86/intel/tpmi: Fix double free in tpmi_create

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: <3c2f9226-8741-4e51-241f-5dbac45cc794@hust.edu.cn>
Date:   Mon, 20 Mar 2023 10:43:07 +0800
From:   Dongliang Mu <dzm91@...t.edu.cn>
To:     srinivas pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Mark Gross <markgross@...nel.org>
Cc:     platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next v2 1/3] platform/x86/intel/tpmi: Fix double
 free in tpmi_create_device()


On 2023/3/17 18:27, srinivas pandruvada wrote:
> Hi Dongliang,
>
> ...
> ...
>
>
>> Hi Srinivas and Hans,
>>
>> How about folding these three patches into one patch and resend a v3
>> patch?
>>
>> This will get all people together and avoid the previous embarrassing
>> sitation.
> This is NOT an embarrassing situation.
> Thanks for finding and fixing the issue.
>
> Thanks,
> Srinivas
>
Hi Srinivas,

Any conclusion about this patch set?

>> Dongliang Mu
>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Hans
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>    drivers/platform/x86/intel/tpmi.c | 17 ++++-------------
>>>>>    1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/tpmi.c
>>>>> b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/tpmi.c
>>>>> index c999732b0f1e..882fe5e4763f 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/tpmi.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/tpmi.c
>>>>> @@ -215,8 +215,8 @@ static int tpmi_create_device(struct
>>>>> intel_tpmi_info *tpmi_info,
>>>>>    
>>>>>           feature_vsec_dev = kzalloc(sizeof(*feature_vsec_dev),
>>>>> GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>           if (!feature_vsec_dev) {
>>>>> -               ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>>> -               goto free_res;
>>>>> +               kfree(res);
>>>>> +               return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>           }
>>>>>    
>>>>>           snprintf(feature_id_name, sizeof(feature_id_name),
>>>>> "tpmi-
>>>>> %s", name);
>>>>> @@ -242,17 +242,8 @@ static int tpmi_create_device(struct
>>>>> intel_tpmi_info *tpmi_info,
>>>>>            * feature_vsec_dev memory is also freed as part of
>>>>> device
>>>>>            * delete.
>>>>>            */
>>>>> -       ret = intel_vsec_add_aux(vsec_dev->pcidev, &vsec_dev-
>>>>>> auxdev.dev,
>>>>> -                                feature_vsec_dev,
>>>>> feature_id_name);
>>>>> -       if (ret)
>>>>> -               goto free_res;
>>>>> -
>>>>> -       return 0;
>>>>> -
>>>>> -free_res:
>>>>> -       kfree(res);
>>>>> -
>>>>> -       return ret;
>>>>> +       return intel_vsec_add_aux(vsec_dev->pcidev, &vsec_dev-
>>>>>> auxdev.dev,
>>>>> +                                 feature_vsec_dev,
>>>>> feature_id_name);
>>>>>    }
>>>>>    
>>>>>    static int tpmi_create_devices(struct intel_tpmi_info
>>>>> *tpmi_info)