[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20230911223809.3505431-3-ninad@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2023 17:38:09 -0500
From: Ninad Palsule <ninad@...ux.ibm.com>
To: jk@...abs.org, joel@....id.au, alistair@...ple.id.au,
eajames@...ux.ibm.com, linux-fsi@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Ninad Palsule <ninad@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] fsi: sbefifo: Validate pending user write
This commit rejects user write operation if previous write operation is
still pending.
As per the current kernel driver design, write operation prepares a
buffer for FSI write, the actual FSI write is performed on next read
operation. There is a possibility of memory leak if buggy application
sends two back to back writes or two parallel writes.
Signed-off-by: Ninad Palsule <ninad@...ux.ibm.com>
---
drivers/fsi/fsi-sbefifo.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/fsi/fsi-sbefifo.c b/drivers/fsi/fsi-sbefifo.c
index a95b32461f8f..fc41cdd6e890 100644
--- a/drivers/fsi/fsi-sbefifo.c
+++ b/drivers/fsi/fsi-sbefifo.c
@@ -877,6 +877,12 @@ static ssize_t sbefifo_user_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
mutex_lock(&user->file_lock);
+ /* Previous write is still in progress */
+ if (user->pending_cmd) {
+ mutex_unlock(&user->file_lock);
+ return -EALREADY;
+ }
+
/* Can we use the pre-allocate buffer ? If not, allocate */
if (len <= PAGE_SIZE)
user->pending_cmd = user->cmd_page;
--
2.39.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists