netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net] sfc: fix potential memory leak in efx_mae_process

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: <jz5q3cbingdq5tn4ahved5pxcez5joeu7bcq6lso5qhc33zxsw@jkrijw6chblw>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 20:06:48 +0530
From: Abdun Nihaal <nihaal@....iitm.ac.in>
To: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
Cc: ecree.xilinx@...il.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, 
	edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, habetsm.xilinx@...il.com, 
	alejandro.lucero-palau@....com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-net-drivers@....com, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net] sfc: fix potential memory leak in
 efx_mae_process_mport()

On Thu, Oct 23, 2025 at 05:48:12PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
> Why not make the caller responsible for freeing desc on failure?

I put the free inside because another function efx_mae_add_mport 
called by efx_mae_process_mport was freeing desc on failure, so I
followed the same style of code, but yes making the caller responsible
would be more cleaner. I'll send a revised patch.