linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 01/12] nvdimm/pmem: Fix leak on dax_add

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: <acb2ca39-412a-4115-95c5-f15e979a43bb@efficios.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2024 17:04:52 -0500
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
 Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>, Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
 Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev, nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
 Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...nel.org>, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/12] nvdimm/pmem: Fix leak on dax_add_host() failure

On 2024-02-08 16:21, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu,  8 Feb 2024 13:49:02 -0500 Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:
> 
>> Fix a leak on dax_add_host() error, where "goto out_cleanup_dax" is done
>> before setting pmem->dax_dev, which therefore issues the two following
>> calls on NULL pointers:
>>
>> out_cleanup_dax:
>>          kill_dax(pmem->dax_dev);
>>          put_dax(pmem->dax_dev);
> 
> Seems inappropriate that this fix is within this patch series?
> 
> otoh I assume dax_add_host() has never failed so it doesn't matter much.
> 
> 
> The series seems useful but is at v4 without much sign of review
> activity.  I think I'll take silence as assent and shall slam it all
> into -next and see who shouts at me.
> 

Thanks Andrew for picking it up! Dan just reacted with feedback that
will help reducing the patch series size by removing intermediate
commits. I'll implement the requested changes and post a v5 in a few
days.

So far there are not behavior changes requested in Dan's feedback.

Should I keep this patch 01/12 within the series for v5 or should I
send it separately ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com