Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] iommu/intel: Fix memleak in intel_irq_remapping_alloc | From | Lu Baolu <> | Date | Tue, 5 Jan 2021 09:51:31 +0800 |
| |
On 1/3/21 2:22 PM, dinghao.liu@zju.edu.cn wrote: >> On 2021/1/3 12:08, dinghao.liu@zju.edu.cn wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On 2021/1/2 17:50, Dinghao Liu wrote: >>>>> When irq_domain_get_irq_data() or irqd_cfg() fails >>>>> meanwhile i == 0, data allocated by kzalloc() has not >>>>> been freed before returning, which leads to memleak. >>>>> >>>>> Fixes: b106ee63abccb ("irq_remapping/vt-d: Enhance Intel IR driver to support hierarchical irqdomains") >>>>> Signed-off-by: Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@zju.edu.cn> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/iommu/intel/irq_remapping.c | 2 ++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/irq_remapping.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/irq_remapping.c >>>>> index aeffda92b10b..cdaeed36750f 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/irq_remapping.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/irq_remapping.c >>>>> @@ -1354,6 +1354,8 @@ static int intel_irq_remapping_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain, >>>>> irq_cfg = irqd_cfg(irq_data); >>>>> if (!irq_data || !irq_cfg) { >>>>> ret = -EINVAL; >>>>> + kfree(data); >>>>> + data = NULL; >>>> >>>> Do you need to check (i == 0) here? @data will not be used anymore as it >>>> goes to out branch, why setting it to NULL here? >>>> >>> >>> data will be passed to ire_data->chip_data when i == 0 and >>> intel_free_irq_resources() will free it on failure. Thus I >> >> Isn't it going to "goto out_free_data"? If "i == 0", the allocated @data >> won't be freed by intel_free_irq_resources(), hence memory leaking. Does >> this patch aim to fix this? >> >> Best regards, >> baolu >> > > Correct, this is what I mean. When i > 0, data has been passed to > irq_data->chip_data, which will be freed in intel_free_irq_resources() > on failure. So there is no memleak in this case. The memleak only occurs > on failure when i == 0 (data has not been passed to irq_data->chip_data).
So how about
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/irq_remapping.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/irq_remapping.c index aeffda92b10b..685200a5cff0 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/irq_remapping.c +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/irq_remapping.c @@ -1353,6 +1353,8 @@ static int intel_irq_remapping_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain, irq_data = irq_domain_get_irq_data(domain, virq + i); irq_cfg = irqd_cfg(irq_data); if (!irq_data || !irq_cfg) { + if (!i) + kfree(data); ret = -EINVAL; goto out_free_data; } > I set data to NULL after kfree() in this patch to prevent double-free > when the failure occurs at i > 0.
if i>0, @data has been passed and will be freed by intel_free_irq_resources() on the failure path. No need to free or clear, right?
Best regards, baolu
> > Regards, > Dinghao > >>> set it to NULL to prevent double-free. However, if we add >>> a check (i == 0) here, we will not need to set it to NULL. >>> If this is better, I will resend a new patch soon. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dinghao >>>
| |