[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20260121113035.20f1f464c5f416998d577784@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 11:30:35 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Weigang He <geoffreyhe2@...il.com>, Masami Hiramatsu
<mhiramat@...nel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tuo Li
<islituo@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts/tracepoint-update: fix memory leak in
make_trace_array()
On Sun, 18 Jan 2026 10:54:57 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Jan 2026 13:02:47 +0000
> Weigang He <geoffreyhe2@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > In make_trace_array(), if add_string() fails after some successful
> > iterations, the function returns without freeing the 'vals' array that
> > was allocated by previous add_string() calls.
> >
> > The add_string() function uses realloc() internally with a local
> > temporary variable, which means the original pointer is preserved on
> > allocation failure. When make_trace_array() returns early on error,
> > the previously allocated memory is leaked.
> >
> > Fix this by freeing 'vals' before returning on the error path.
> >
> > This bug is found by my static analysis tool and my code review.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tuo Li <islituo@...il.com>
> > ---
> > scripts/tracepoint-update.c | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/scripts/tracepoint-update.c b/scripts/tracepoint-update.c
> > index 90046aedc97b9..7bc9d66229ddf 100644
> > --- a/scripts/tracepoint-update.c
> > +++ b/scripts/tracepoint-update.c
> > @@ -93,8 +93,10 @@ static void make_trace_array(struct elf_tracepoint *etrace)
> > for_each_shdr_str(len, ehdr, check_data_sec) {
> > if (!len)
> > continue;
> > - if (add_string(str, &vals, &count) < 0)
> > + if (add_string(str, &vals, &count) < 0) {
> > + free(vals);
> > return;
> > + }
> > }
>
> It would make much more sense to have add_string() free vals, and set
> vals to NULL on error.
I think it should be failed if it fails to add string. Can it
continue checking tracepoints even after the error?
Thank you,
>
> -- Steve
>
>
> >
> > /* If CONFIG_TRACEPOINT_VERIFY_USED is not set, there's nothing to do */
>
>
--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists