This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled nvmem: core: fix possibly memleak when use nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell() to the 5.8-stable tree which can be found at: http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary The filename of the patch is: nvmem-core-fix-possibly-memleak-when-use-nvmem_cell_.patch and it can be found in the queue-5.8 subdirectory. If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it. commit 0d959a117e7a8c521eb6a61e25f2547b2ad3e9ba Author: Vadym Kochan <vadym.kochan@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed Sep 23 23:44:56 2020 +0300 nvmem: core: fix possibly memleak when use nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell() [ Upstream commit fc9eec4d643597cf4cb2fef17d48110e677610da ] Fix missing 'kfree_const(cell->name)' when call to nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell() in several places: * after nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell() failed during nvmem_add_cells() * during nvmem_device_cell_{read,write} when cell->name is kstrdup'ed() without calling kfree_const() at the end, but really there is no reason to do that 'dup, because the cell instance is allocated on the stack for some short period to be read/write without exposing it to the caller. So the new nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell_nodup() helper is introduced which is used to convert cell_info -> cell without name duplication as a lighweight version of nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell(). Fixes: e2a5402ec7c6 ("nvmem: Add nvmem_device based consumer apis.") Reviewed-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Vadym Kochan <vadym.kochan@xxxxxxxxxxx> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200923204456.14032-1-vadym.kochan@xxxxxxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/core.c b/drivers/nvmem/core.c index 394e75dede725..4aca5b4a87d75 100644 --- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c +++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c @@ -355,16 +355,14 @@ static void nvmem_cell_add(struct nvmem_cell *cell) blocking_notifier_call_chain(&nvmem_notifier, NVMEM_CELL_ADD, cell); } -static int nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, - const struct nvmem_cell_info *info, - struct nvmem_cell *cell) +static int nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell_nodup(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, + const struct nvmem_cell_info *info, + struct nvmem_cell *cell) { cell->nvmem = nvmem; cell->offset = info->offset; cell->bytes = info->bytes; - cell->name = kstrdup_const(info->name, GFP_KERNEL); - if (!cell->name) - return -ENOMEM; + cell->name = info->name; cell->bit_offset = info->bit_offset; cell->nbits = info->nbits; @@ -376,13 +374,30 @@ static int nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, if (!IS_ALIGNED(cell->offset, nvmem->stride)) { dev_err(&nvmem->dev, "cell %s unaligned to nvmem stride %d\n", - cell->name, nvmem->stride); + cell->name ?: "<unknown>", nvmem->stride); return -EINVAL; } return 0; } +static int nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, + const struct nvmem_cell_info *info, + struct nvmem_cell *cell) +{ + int err; + + err = nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell_nodup(nvmem, info, cell); + if (err) + return err; + + cell->name = kstrdup_const(info->name, GFP_KERNEL); + if (!cell->name) + return -ENOMEM; + + return 0; +} + /** * nvmem_add_cells() - Add cell information to an nvmem device * @@ -1436,7 +1451,7 @@ ssize_t nvmem_device_cell_read(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, if (!nvmem) return -EINVAL; - rc = nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell(nvmem, info, &cell); + rc = nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell_nodup(nvmem, info, &cell); if (rc) return rc; @@ -1466,7 +1481,7 @@ int nvmem_device_cell_write(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, if (!nvmem) return -EINVAL; - rc = nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell(nvmem, info, &cell); + rc = nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell_nodup(nvmem, info, &cell); if (rc) return rc;