netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 4/5] net: mscc: ocelot: make entry_type a member of struct ocelot

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201031090751.6olljapbivitzf6k@skbuf>
Date:   Sat, 31 Oct 2020 09:07:52 +0000
From:   Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/5] net: mscc: ocelot: make entry_type a member
 of struct ocelot_multicast

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 06:16:31PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 04:27:37 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > +		mc = devm_kzalloc(ocelot->dev, sizeof(*mc), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +		if (!mc)
> > +			return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +		mc->entry_type = ocelot_classify_mdb(mdb->addr);
> > +		ether_addr_copy(mc->addr, mdb->addr);
> > +		mc->vid = vid;
> > +
> > +		pgid = ocelot_mdb_get_pgid(ocelot, mc);
> >  
> >  		if (pgid < 0) {
> >  			dev_err(ocelot->dev,
> > @@ -1038,24 +1044,19 @@ int ocelot_port_mdb_add(struct ocelot *ocelot, int port,
> >  			return -ENOSPC;
> >  		}
> 
> Transitionally leaking mc here on pgid < 0

Is it a real leakage if it's allocated with devm though? At some point
it's still going to be freed. Nonetheless I agree there's still a lot of
work to do. Maybe I didn't choose the best moment to concentrate on a
new feature, should have focused on cleanup more beforehand, including a
change from devm to plain allocation/free of resources.