> On Aug 26, 2022, at 7:08 AM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 12:24:54PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>> If this memdup_user() call fails, the memory allocated in a previous call
>> a few lines above should be freed. Otherwise it leaks.
>>
>> Fixes: 6ee95d1c8991 ("nfsd: add support for upcall version 2")
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> Speculative, untested.
>> ---
>> fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c
>> index b29d27eaa8a6..248ff9f4141c 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c
>> @@ -815,8 +815,10 @@ __cld_pipe_inprogress_downcall(const struct cld_msg_v2 __user *cmsg,
>> princhash.data = memdup_user(
>> &ci->cc_princhash.cp_data,
>> princhashlen);
>> - if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(princhash.data))
>> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(princhash.data)) {
>> + kfree(name.data);
>> return -EFAULT;
>
> This comment is not directed at you and is not related to your patch.
> But memdup_user() never returns NULL, only error pointers. I wrote a
> fifteen page blog entry about NULL vs error pointers the other week.
> https://staticthinking.wordpress.com/2022/08/01/mixing-error-pointers-and-null/
> This should propagate the error code from memdup_user() instead of
> -EFAULT.
I take it then that Christophe should redrive this with your suggested
corrections? I haven't applied this yet because I was waiting for
follow-up.
--
Chuck Lever
