Luca Coelho <luca@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 15:57 +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Luca Coelho <luca@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > From: Christophe Jaillet <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > We should free 'wgds.pointer' here as done a few lines above in another
>> > error handling path.
>> > It was allocated within 'acpi_evaluate_object()'.
>> >
>> > Fixes: c52030a01ccc ("iwlwifi: mvm: add GEO_TX_POWER_LIMIT cmd for geographic tx power table")
>> > Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Signed-off-by: Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/fw.c | 6 ++++--
>> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/fw.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/fw.c
>> > index 79e7a7a285dc..82863e9273eb 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/fw.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/fw.c
>> > @@ -1275,8 +1275,10 @@ static int iwl_mvm_sar_get_wgds_table(struct iwl_mvm *mvm)
>> >
>> > entry = &wifi_pkg->package.elements[idx++];
>> > if ((entry->type != ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER) ||
>> > - (entry->integer.value > U8_MAX))
>> > - return -EINVAL;
>> > + (entry->integer.value > U8_MAX)) {
>> > + ret = -EINVAL;
>> > + goto out_free;
>> > + }
>>
>> How likely is this leak to happen in real world? To me it looks like
>> more like a theoretical issue and could have easily waited for 4.14. But
>> it's fine this time, just something to keep in mind in the future.
>
> This is a one-liner fix and I consider memory leaks serious enough to
> deserve a fix for rc5. This bug can happen with broken ACPI tables and,
> trust me, broken ACPI tables are not that hard to find.
Sure, anything's possible. But what I'm reading here this is still a
theoretical issue, not a leak which we _know_ will happen to thousands
of people.
> But you rule here, feel free to NACK my patches whenever you see fit! :)
I'm trying to minimise the numbers of patches going to wireless-drivers
and striving for only fixes which really matter and keep the theoretical
stuff for -next. The is mostly selfish reasons as wireless-drivers are a
lot more work, especially if there are conflicts.
But like I said in my previous mail, no need to drop this.
--
Kalle Valo
