On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 06:27:53PM -0600, Suman Anna wrote:
> On 2/25/20 9:13 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> >
> > On 2020/2/26 上午12:51, Suman Anna wrote:
> >> Hi Jason,
> >>
> >> On 2/24/20 11:39 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>> On 2020/2/25 上午5:26, Suman Anna wrote:
> >>>> The functions vring_new_virtqueue() and __vring_new_virtqueue() are
> >>>> used
> >>>> with split rings, and any allocations within these functions are
> >>>> managed
> >>>> outside of the .we_own_ring flag. The commit cbeedb72b97a
> >>>> ("virtio_ring:
> >>>> allocate desc state for split ring separately") allocates the desc
> >>>> state
> >>>> within the __vring_new_virtqueue() but frees it only when the
> >>>> .we_own_ring
> >>>> flag is set. This leads to a memory leak when freeing such allocated
> >>>> virtqueues with the vring_del_virtqueue() function.
> >>>>
> >>>> Fix this by moving the desc_state free code outside the flag and only
> >>>> for split rings. Issue was discovered during testing with remoteproc
> >>>> and virtio_rpmsg.
> >>>>
> >>>> Fixes: cbeedb72b97a ("virtio_ring: allocate desc state for split ring
> >>>> separately")
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna<s-anna@xxxxxx>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 4 ++--
> >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> >>>> b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> >>>> index 867c7ebd3f10..58b96baa8d48 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> >>>> @@ -2203,10 +2203,10 @@ void vring_del_virtqueue(struct virtqueue *_vq)
> >>>> vq->split.queue_size_in_bytes,
> >>>> vq->split.vring.desc,
> >>>> vq->split.queue_dma_addr);
> >>>> -
> >>>> - kfree(vq->split.desc_state);
> >>>> }
> >>>> }
> >>>> + if (!vq->packed_ring)
> >>>> + kfree(vq->split.desc_state);
> >>> Nitpick, it looks to me it would be more clear if we just free
> >>> desc_state unconditionally here (and remove the kfree for packed above).
> >> OK, are you sure you want that to be folded into this patch? It looks to
> >> me a separate cleanup/consolidation patch, and packed desc_state does
> >> not suffer this memleak, and need not be backported into stable kernels.
> >>
> >> regards
> >> Suman
> >
> >
> > Though it's just a small tweak, I'm fine for leaving it for future.
> >
> > So
> >
> > Acked-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
>
> Mike,
> Ping on this. I don't see the patch in -next yet. Can we get this into
> the current -rc please?
>
> regards
> Suman
Yes will queue it shortly, thanks!
