netdev - RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: check memory allocation failure

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: <309B89C4C689E141A5FF6A0C5FB2118B8C6A028B@ORSMSX101.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Sep 2017 02:24:37 +0000
From:   "Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>
To:     Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
        "Waskiewicz Jr, Peter" <peter.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
        "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
        "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: check memory allocation failure

> From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-bounces@...osl.org] On Behalf
> Of Christophe JAILLET
> Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 10:13 AM
> To: Waskiewicz Jr, Peter <peter.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>; Kirsher, Jeffrey T
> <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org; intel-wired-
> lan@...ts.osuosl.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: check memory allocation failure
> 
> Le 28/08/2017 à 01:09, Waskiewicz Jr, Peter a écrit :
> > On 8/27/17 2:42 AM, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> >> Check memory allocation failures and return -ENOMEM in such cases, as
> >> already done for other memory allocations in this function.
> >>
> >> This avoids NULL pointers dereference.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
> >> ---
> >>    drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c | 2 ++
> >>    1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >>

This seems to be fine from a "it does not break in testing" perspective, so...

Tested-by: Aaron Brown <aaron.f.brown@...el.com

> > -PJ
> >
> Hi,
> 
> in fact, there is no leak because the only caller of 'igb_sw_init()'
> (i.e. 'igb_probe()'), already frees these resources in case of error,
> see [1]
> 
> These resources are also freed  in 'igb_remove()'.
> 
> Best reagrds,
> CJ
> 
> [1]:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-
> next.git/tree/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c#n2775

But is PJ's comment saying that it is not really necessary?  If so I tend to lean towards the don't touch it if it's not broken perspective.