[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2026011805-bamboo-disband-926a@gregkh>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2026 16:02:44 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Osama Abdelkader <osama.abdelkader@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
"Jiri Slaby (SUSE)" <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
Sjur Braendeland <sjur.brandeland@...ricsson.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
syzbot+f9d847b2b84164fa69f3@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: caif: fix memory leak in ldisc_receive
On Sun, Jan 18, 2026 at 03:47:54PM +0100, Osama Abdelkader wrote:
> Add NULL pointer checks for ser and ser->dev in ldisc_receive() to
> prevent memory leaks when the function is called during device close
> or in race conditions where tty->disc_data or ser->dev may be NULL.
>
> The memory leak occurred because netdev_alloc_skb() would allocate an
> skb, but if ser or ser->dev was NULL, the function would return early
> without freeing the allocated skb. Additionally, ser->dev was accessed
> before checking if it was NULL, which could cause a NULL pointer
> dereference.
>
> Reported-by: syzbot+f9d847b2b84164fa69f3@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> Closes:
> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=f9d847b2b84164fa69f3
Please do not wrap this line.
> Fixes: 9b27105b4a44 ("net-caif-driver: add CAIF serial driver (ldisc)")
> CC: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Osama Abdelkader <osama.abdelkader@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/caif/caif_serial.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/caif/caif_serial.c b/drivers/net/caif/caif_serial.c
> index c398ac42eae9..0ec9670bd35c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/caif/caif_serial.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/caif/caif_serial.c
> @@ -152,12 +152,16 @@ static void ldisc_receive(struct tty_struct *tty, const u8 *data,
> int ret;
>
> ser = tty->disc_data;
> + if (!ser)
> + return;
Can this ever be true?
> /*
> * NOTE: flags may contain information about break or overrun.
> * This is not yet handled.
> */
>
> + if (!ser->dev)
> + return;
Why is this check here and not just merged together with the one you
added above? And how can ->dev be NULL?
And where is the locking to prevent this from changing right after you
check it?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists