netdev - RE: [PATCH rdma-next 4/8] IB/core: Skip device which doesn't have necessary capabilities

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]

Date:   Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:31:19 +0000
From:   Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
CC:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...nelisnetworks.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Karsten Graul <kgraul@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@...nelisnetworks.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "rds-devel@....oracle.com" <rds-devel@....oracle.com>,
        Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH rdma-next 4/8] IB/core: Skip device which doesn't have
 necessary capabilities



> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 5:46 PM
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 03:44:35PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> 
> > > If it returns EOPNOTUPP then the remove is never called so if it
> > > allocated memory and left it allocated then it is leaking memory.
> > >
> > I probably confused you. There is no leak today because add_one
> > allocates memory, and later on when SA/CM etc per port cap is not
> > present, it is unused left there which is freed on remove_one().
> > Returning EOPNOTUPP is fine at start of add_one() before allocation.
> 
> Most of ULPs are OK, eg umad does:
> 
> 	umad_dev = kzalloc(struct_size(umad_dev, ports, e - s + 1),
> GFP_KERNEL);
> 	if (!umad_dev)
> 		return -ENOMEM;
> 	for (i = s; i <= e; ++i) {
> 		if (!rdma_cap_ib_mad(device, i))
> 			continue;
> 
> 	if (!count) {
> 		ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> 		goto free;
> free:
> 	/* balances kref_init */
> 	ib_umad_dev_put(umad_dev);
> 
> It looks like only cm.c and cma.c need fixing, just fix those two.
Only cma.c needs a fixing. cm.c also reports EOPNOTSUPP.
I will send the simplified fix through Leon.