On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 01:55:33 +0200 Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Greetings & Salutations, > > The Coverity checker spotted two potential memory leaks in > drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c::mpt_attach(). > > There are two returns that may leak the storage allocated for > 'ioc' (sizeof(MPT_ADAPTER) bytes). > A simple fix would be to simply add two kfree() calls before > the return statements, but a better fix (that this patch > implements) is to reorder the code so that if we hit the first > return condition we don't have to do the allocation at all and > then just add a kfree() call for the second case. > > Please consider applying. Patch has been compile tested only. > > umm, > --- > > drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c | 13 +++++++------ > 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c b/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c > index e866dac..f9bb705 100644 > --- a/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c > +++ b/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c > @@ -1393,18 +1393,18 @@ mpt_attach(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *id) > struct proc_dir_entry *dent, *ent; > #endif > > + if (mpt_debug_level) > + printk(KERN_INFO MYNAM ": mpt_debug_level=%xh\n", mpt_debug_level); > + > + if (pci_enable_device(pdev)) > + return r; > + > ioc = kzalloc(sizeof(MPT_ADAPTER), GFP_ATOMIC); Why on earth is that using GFP_ATOMIC? This function later goes on to create procfs files and such things. y'know, we could have a debug option which will spit warnings if someone does a !__GFP_WAIT allocation while !in_atomic() (only works if CONFIG_PREEMPT). But please, make it depend on !CONFIG_AKPM. I shudder to think about all the stuff it would pick up. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
