On 7/18/22 8:30 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 08:11:59AM -0400, Dennis Dalessandro wrote:
>> On 7/18/22 6:39 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 07:52:25AM -0400, Dennis Dalessandro wrote:
>>>> On 7/11/22 3:07 AM, Jianglei Nie wrote:
>>>>> setup_base_ctxt() allocates a memory chunk for uctxt->groups with
>>>>> hfi1_alloc_ctxt_rcv_groups(). When init_user_ctxt() fails, uctxt->groups
>>>>> is not released, which will lead to a memory leak.
>>>>>
>>>>> We should release the uctxt->groups with hfi1_free_ctxt_rcv_groups()
>>>>> when init_user_ctxt() fails.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jianglei Nie <niejianglei2021@xxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/file_ops.c | 4 +++-
>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/file_ops.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/file_ops.c
>>>>> index 2e4cf2b11653..629beff053ad 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/file_ops.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/file_ops.c
>>>>> @@ -1179,8 +1179,10 @@ static int setup_base_ctxt(struct hfi1_filedata *fd,
>>>>> goto done;
>>>>>
>>>>> ret = init_user_ctxt(fd, uctxt);
>>>>> - if (ret)
>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>> + hfi1_free_ctxt_rcv_groups(uctxt);
>>>>> goto done;
>>>>> + }
>>>>>
>>>>> user_init(uctxt);
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't seem like this patch is correct. The free is done when the file is
>>>> closed, along with other clean up stuff. See hfi1_file_close().
>>>
>>> Can setup_base_ctxt() be called twice for same uctxt?
>>> You are allocating rcd->groups and not releasing.
>>
>> The first thing assign_ctxt() does is a check of the fd->uctxt and it bails with
>> -EINVAL. So effectively only once.
>
> I'm slightly confused. How will you release rcd->groups?
>
> assign_ctxt()
> -> setup_base_ctxt()
> -> hfi1_alloc_ctxt_rcv_groups()
> ,,,
> rcd->groups = kzalloc...
> ...
> -> init_user_ctxt() <-- fails and leaves fd->uctx == NULL
>
>
> ...
> hfi1_file_close()
> struct hfi1_ctxtdata *uctxt = fdata->uctxt;
> ...
> if (!uctxt) <-- This is our case
> goto done;
> ...
>
> done:
> if (refcount_dec_and_test(&dd->user_refcount))
> complete(&dd->user_comp);
>
> cleanup_srcu_struct(&fdata->pq_srcu);
> kfree(fdata);
> return 0;
>
Looks like this may have been broken with:
e87473bc1b6c ("IB/hfi1: Only set fd pointer when base context is completely
initialized")
The question is does it make more sense to just move the fd->uctxt assignment
up, or call the free directly. I think that might be opening a bigger can of
worms though, as this was part of a larger patch set. Maybe it is best after all
to go with this patch.
Let's add the above as a fixes line and tack on:
Acked-by: Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
It's been like this since 4.14, so no rush to get it in for the ultra late RC.
I'll get it tested as part of the next cycle.
-Denny
