netdev - Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: call teardown method on probe 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: <20210204170614.zutxxuufsx53lcgg@skbuf>
Date:   Thu, 4 Feb 2021 17:06:15 +0000
From:   Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: call teardown method on probe failure

On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 06:00:26PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 06:33:51PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > Since teardown is supposed to undo the effects of the setup method, it
> > should be called in the error path for dsa_switch_setup, not just in
> > dsa_switch_teardown.
> 
> I disagree with this. If setup failed, it should of cleaned itself up.
> That is the generally accepted way of doing things. If a function is
> going to exit with an error, it should first undo whatever it did
> before exiting.
> 
> You are adding extra semantics to the teardown op. It can no longer
> assume setup was successful. So it needs to be very careful about what
> it tears down, it cannot assume everything has been setup. I doubt the
> existing implementations actually do that.

I'm sorry, I don't understand.
I write a driver, I implement .setup(). I allocate some memory, I expect
that I can deallocate it in .teardown().
Now dsa_switch_setup comes, calls my .setup() which succedes. But then
mdiobus_register(ds->slave_mii_bus) which comes right after .setup()
fails. Are you saying we shouldn't call the driver's .teardown()?
Why not?