Hi Xingui, kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Xingui-Yang/scsi-libsas-Allow-smp_execute_task-arguments-to-be-on-the-stack/20240307-174215 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mkp/scsi.git for-next patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240307093733.41222-2-yangxingui%40huawei.com patch subject: [PATCH v3 1/3] scsi: libsas: Allow smp_execute_task() arguments to be on the stack config: i386-randconfig-141-20240308 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240310/202403102353.jUPi6fOP-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config) compiler: gcc-12 (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0 If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> | Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202403102353.jUPi6fOP-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/ New smatch warnings: drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c:148 smp_execute_task() warn: possible memory leak of '_req' vim +/_req +148 drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 138 static int smp_execute_task(struct domain_device *dev, void *req, int req_size, adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 139 void *resp, int resp_size) adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 140 { adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 141 struct scatterlist req_sg; adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 142 struct scatterlist resp_sg; adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 143 void *_req = kmemdup(req, req_size, GFP_KERNEL); adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 144 void *_resp = alloc_smp_resp(resp_size); adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 145 int ret; adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 146 adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 147 if (!_req || !resp) adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 @148 return -ENOMEM; I haven't looked at the callers so I don't know how likely it is for one of the allocations to fail and the other succeed... But it seems possible. adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 149 adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 150 sg_init_one(&req_sg, _req, req_size); adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 151 sg_init_one(&resp_sg, _resp, resp_size); adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 152 ret = smp_execute_task_sg(dev, &req_sg, &resp_sg); adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 153 memcpy(resp, _resp, resp_size); adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 154 kfree(_req); adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 155 kfree(_resp); adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 156 return ret; adfd2325dfc5cf6 Xingui Yang 2024-03-07 157 } -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
