> > On 29 Jan 2024, at 15:54, alexious@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > >>> On 22 Jan 2024, at 20:27, Zhipeng Lu <alexious@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > >>> When the switch statment goes to default and return an error, ptr should > >>> be freed since it is allocated in hfs_find_init. > >>> > >> > >> Do you have any memory leaks report? Could you share it in the comments? > >> Which use-case reproduces the issue? It will be easier to review the fix > >> If you can share the path of reproduction. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Slava. > > > > Well, we found this potential memory leak by static analysis. > > > > We found that all of hfs_find_init's callers won't release `ptr` when > > hfs_find_init fails, while they will do release `ptr` when functions > > that after hfs_find_init fails. This tactic observation suggests that > > hfs_find_init proberly should release `ptr` when it fails, i.e. in the > > default branch of switch in this patch. > > > > Besides, we noticed another implementation of hfs_find_init in > > fs/hfsplus/bfind.c, which is essentially identical to the one in > > this patch (in fs/hfs/bfind.c) but calling `BUG();` in default branch > > to trigger an error-handling. > > > > I see. I believe it makes sense to add all of this explanation > into comment section. Modification looks good. Mostly, hfs_find_exit() > does freeing resources and if hfs_find_init() fails, then hfs_find_exit() > is never called. Maybe, it makes sense to set fd->tree = NULL too but > it is not critical, as far as I can see. > > Could you please rework the comment section of the patch? Sure, I'll including such idea in this patch and send a v2 version of this patch. Thanks, Zhipeng. > Thanks, > Slava.
