[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2aae349c-dd80-44da-9715-a214f6946b75@rowland.harvard.edu>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2024 22:13:08 -0500
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Ma Ke <make_ruc2021@....com>
Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr,
stanley_chang@...ltek.com, mka@...omium.org, oneukum@...e.com,
quic_ugoswami@...cinc.com, javier.carrasco@...fvision.net,
kay.sievers@...y.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] usb: fix reference leak in usb_new_device()
On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 10:19:40AM +0800, Ma Ke wrote:
> When device_add(&udev->dev) failed, calling put_device() to explicitly
> release udev->dev. And the routine which calls usb_new_device() does
> not call put_device() when an error occurs.
That is wrong.
usb_new_device() is called by hub_port_connect(). The code does:
status = usb_new_device(udev);
...
if (status)
goto loop_disable;
...
loop_disable:
hub_port_disable(hub, port1, 1);
loop:
usb_ep0_reinit(udev);
release_devnum(udev);
hub_free_dev(udev);
if (retry_locked) {
mutex_unlock(hcd->address0_mutex);
usb_unlock_port(port_dev);
}
usb_put_dev(udev);
And usb_put_dev() is defined in usb.c as:
void usb_put_dev(struct usb_device *dev)
{
if (dev)
put_device(&dev->dev);
}
So you see, if usb_new_device() returns a nonzero value then
put_device() _is_ called.
> As comment of device_add()
> says, 'if device_add() succeeds, you should call device_del() when you
> want to get rid of it. If device_add() has not succeeded, use only
> put_device() to drop the reference count'.
You are correct that if device_add() succeeds and a later call fails,
then usb_new_device() does not properly call device_del(). Please
rewrite your patch to fix only that problem.
Alan Stern
Powered by blists - more mailing lists