From: Rustam Kovhaev <rkovhaev@gmail.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: kuba@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] veth: fix memory leak in veth_newlink()
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2020 15:59:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200901225944.GB239544@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200901.130127.236989626732311083.davem@davemloft.net>
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 01:01:27PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Rustam Kovhaev <rkovhaev@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2020 06:13:36 -0700
>
> > when register_netdevice(dev) fails we should check whether struct
> > veth_rq has been allocated via ndo_init callback and free it, because,
> > depending on the code path, register_netdevice() might not call
> > priv_destructor() callback
> >
> > Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+59ef240dd8f0ed7598a8@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=59ef240dd8f0ed7598a8
> > Signed-off-by: Rustam Kovhaev <rkovhaev@gmail.com>
>
> I think I agree with Toshiaki here. There is no reason why the
> rollback_registered() path of register_netdevice() should behave
> differently from the normal control flow.
>
> Any code path that invokes ->ndo_uninit() should probably also
> invoke the priv destructor.
hi David, thank you for the review!
>
> The question is why does the err_uninit: label of register_netdevice
> behave differently from rollback_registered()? If there is a reason,
> it should be documented in a comment or similar. If it is wrong,
> it should be corrected.
good question, that i do not know, i'll review it
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-01 22:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-30 13:13 [PATCH] veth: fix memory leak in veth_newlink() Rustam Kovhaev
2020-08-31 0:16 ` Toshiaki Makita
2020-08-31 0:51 ` Rustam Kovhaev
2020-08-31 1:43 ` Toshiaki Makita
2020-09-01 20:01 ` David Miller
2020-09-01 22:59 ` Rustam Kovhaev [this message]
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=20200901225944.GB239544@thinkpad \
--to=rkovhaev@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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.