linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH net v5 2/4] dpll: fix pin dump crash for rebound module

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2024 13:49:25 +0000
From: "Kubalewski, Arkadiusz" <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev" <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>,
	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>, "Olech, Milena"
	<milena.olech@...el.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>, mschmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>, "Glaza,
 Jan" <jan.glaza@...el.com>, "Kitszel, Przemyslaw"
	<przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net v5 2/4] dpll: fix pin dump crash for rebound module

>From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
>Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2024 12:44 PM
>
>Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 12:07:17PM CET, arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>@@ -443,7 +490,9 @@ dpll_pin_alloc(u64 clock_id, u32 pin_idx, struct
>>module *module,
>> 		ret = -EINVAL;
>> 		goto err_pin_prop;
>> 	}
>>-	pin->prop = prop;
>>+	ret = dpll_pin_prop_dup(prop, &pin->prop);
>>+	if (ret)
>>+		goto err_pin_prop;
>> 	refcount_set(&pin->refcount, 1);
>> 	xa_init_flags(&pin->dpll_refs, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC);
>> 	xa_init_flags(&pin->parent_refs, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC);
>
>You are missing dpll_pin_prop_free() call on error path. It should go
>right above "err_pin_prop:" line.
>
>Haste makes waste..


True, fixed in v6.

>
>pw-bot: cr
>
>
>
>>@@ -515,6 +564,7 @@ void dpll_pin_put(struct dpll_pin *pin)
>> 		xa_destroy(&pin->dpll_refs);
>> 		xa_destroy(&pin->parent_refs);
>> 		xa_erase(&dpll_pin_xa, pin->id);
>>+		dpll_pin_prop_free(&pin->prop);
>
>To be symmetric with dpll_pin_alloc() order, xa_erase() should be called
>first here and xa_destroys() in different order. But that is a material
>for net-next.

Makes sense.

Thank you!
Arkadiusz

>
>
>
>> 		kfree(pin);
>> 	}
>> 	mutex_unlock(&dpll_lock);
>
>[...]