Re: [RESEND PATCH v5 2/3] test_firmware: fix a memory leak with reqs buffer

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 5/18/23 17:20, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 08:58:58PM +0200, Mirsad Goran Todorovac wrote:
On 12. 05. 2023. 15:09, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 02:34:29PM +0200, Mirsad Todorovac wrote:
@@ -1011,6 +1016,11 @@ ssize_t trigger_batched_requests_async_store(struct device *dev,
    	mutex_lock(&test_fw_mutex);
+	if (test_fw_config->reqs) {
+		rc = -EBUSY;
+		goto out_bail;
+	}
+
    	test_fw_config->reqs =
    		vzalloc(array3_size(sizeof(struct test_batched_req),
    				    test_fw_config->num_requests, 2));

I was just thinking, since returning -EBUSY for the case of already allocated
test_fw_config->reqs was your suggestion and your idea, maybe it would be OK
to properly reflect that in Co-developed-by: or Signed-off-by: , but if I
understood well, the CoC requires that I am explicitly approved of those?


If everyone else is okay, let's just apply this as-is.  You did all the
hard bits.

regards,
dan carpenter

If it is OK with you, then I hope I have your Reviewed-by:


Wow.  Sorry for all the delay on this.

No, not at all. I don't want to be a nag and overwhelm developers. :-)

Reviewed-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thank you.

I suppose this is for 2/3.

Did you consider reviewing the other two patches?

I'm kinda still uncertain about the proper procedure.
This certainly isn't "the perfect patch" :-)

Heh.

regards,
dan carpenter

Well, I have about come to the limits of CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK setting,
with a happy catch of about a dozen bugs, but this is still less than 0.1% of the expected 11,000 bugs for a codebase sized 10.9 million line.

So I am considering the use of a static analysis tool. Like Smatch.

Thank Heavens, most of the code is modular, and about 90% of the
functions are static and thereof, of course, having the scope limited
to their module.

I am still only catching bugs like memleaks and lockups when they
manifest, proactive search for bugs is a new level I suppose.

Best regards,
Mirsad



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux