[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1419071709.2461.86.camel@jtkirshe-mobl.home>
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 02:35:09 -0800
From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
To: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@....com>
Cc: todd.fujinaka@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux.nics@...el.com
Subject: Re: [linux-nics] [PATCH] igb in linux-3.18.0: some potential bugs
On Sat, 2014-12-20 at 16:11 +0800, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
> I have actually tested igb driver on the real hardware(Intel 82575EB
> PCI-E
> Gigabit Ethernet Controller), and find some potential bugs:
> The target file is drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
>
> (1) In the normal process of igb, pci_enable_pcie_error_reporting and
> pci_disable_pcie_error_reporting is called in pairs in igb_probe and
> igb_remove. However, when pci_enable_pcie_error_reporting has been
> called
> and alloc_etherdev_mqs in igb_probe is failed, "err_alloc_etherdev"
> segment
> in igb_probe is executed immediately to exit, but
> pci_disable_pcie_error_reporting is not called.
> (2) The same situation happens when pci_iomap in igb_probe is failed.
> (3) The same situation happens when igb_sw_init in igb_probe is
> failed.
> (4) The same situation happens when register_netdev in igb_probe is
> failed.
> (5) The same situation happens when igb_init_i2c in igb_probe is
> failed.
>
> (6) The function kcalloc is called by igb_sw_init when initializing
> the
> ethernet card driver, but kfree is not called when register_netdev in
> igb_probe is failed, which may cause memory leak.
> (7) The same situation happens when igb_init_i2c in igb_probe is
> failed.
> (8) The same situation happens when kzalloc in igb_alloc_q_vector is
> failed.
> (9) The same situation happens when igb_alloc_q_vector in
> igb_alloc_q_vectors is failed.
>
> (10) When igb_init_i2c in igb_probe is failed, igb_enable_sriov is
> called in
> igb_probe_vfs, but igb_disable_sriov is not called.
> (11) The same situation with [10] happens when register_netdev in
> igb_probe
> is failed.
>
> Meanwhile, I also write the patch to fix the bugs. I have run the
> patch on
> the hardware, it can work normally and fix the above bugs.
Was this a bug you actually saw? Or a theoretical bug based on code
review?
I do not mind adding this to my queue so that we can review and test the
patch, although this will cause a fair amount of regression testing.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists