From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@icloud.com>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix potential memory leak in mount option parsing
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 08:05:24 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180225210524.GE30854@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fe6ac2e6-bac0-7f8f-4a24-f72439365848@sandeen.net>
On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 12:11:28PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>
>
> On 2/25/18 12:09 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 12:11:23PM +0800, Chengguang Xu wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 在 2018年2月25日,上午1:58,Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> 写道:
> >>>
> >>> On 2/24/18 4:33 AM, Chengguang Xu wrote:
> >>>> When specifying string type mount option (e.g., logdev)
> >>>> several times in a mount, current option parsing may
> >>>> cause memory leak. Hence, call kfree for previous one
> >>>> in this case.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@icloud.com>
> >>>
> >>> IMHO multiple specifications of logdev or rtdev should not
> >>> be allowed; only one may be chosen, and specifying twice
> >>> should probably be considered and administrative error.
> >>>
> >>> I'd rather see something that fails and cleans up properly
> >>> if either option is respecified.
> >>
> >> Hi Eric,
> >>
> >> Thanks for quick reply. I think your suggestion makes sense,
> >> but considering of the consistency with other options,
> >> we should check multiple specifications for all options.
> >>
> >> So I think this patch is the cheapest way to fix the issue.
> >> What do you think?
> >
> > I think the all the mount options should be cleaned up to allow one
> > specification only.
>
> Yeah, I think so too, though perhaps it's fair to have one patch
> to fix the leak as it stands today, and another to clean up the
> respecification problem.
Won't that break existing userspace configs? Haven't we had cases in
the past where mount did something whacky and passed dulicate
options to the kernel through no fault of the user?
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-25 21:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-24 10:33 [PATCH] xfs: fix potential memory leak in mount option parsing Chengguang Xu
2018-02-24 17:58 ` Eric Sandeen
2018-02-25 4:11 ` Chengguang Xu
2018-02-25 18:09 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-02-25 18:11 ` Eric Sandeen
2018-02-25 21:05 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2018-02-25 21:15 ` Eric Sandeen
2018-02-26 1:49 ` Chengguang Xu
2018-02-26 2:47 ` Eric Sandeen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180225210524.GE30854@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=cgxu519@icloud.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.