Leaking btrfs_qgroup_inherit on snapshot creation?

Leaking btrfs_qgroup_inherit on snapshot creation?

[Alex Lyakas]

Hi Jan, Arne,
I see this code in create_snapshot:

	if (inherit) {
		pending_snapshot->inherit = *inherit;
		*inherit = NULL;	/* take responsibility to free it */
	}

So, first thing I think it should be:
if (*inherit)
because in btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_v2() we have:
struct btrfs_qgroup_inherit *inherit = NULL;
...
btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_transid(..., &inherit)

so the current check is very unlikely to be NULL.

Second, I don't see anybody freeing pending_snapshot->inherit. I guess
it should be freed after callin btrfs_qgroup_inherit() and also in
btrfs_destroy_pending_snapshots().

Thanks,
Alex.

Re: Leaking btrfs_qgroup_inherit on snapshot creation?

[Arne Jansen]

Hi Alex,

On 02/06/13 12:18, Alex Lyakas wrote:
> Hi Jan, Arne,
> I see this code in create_snapshot:
> 
> 	if (inherit) {
> 		pending_snapshot->inherit = *inherit;
> 		*inherit = NULL;	/* take responsibility to free it */
> 	}
> 
> So, first thing I think it should be:
> if (*inherit)
> because in btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_v2() we have:
> struct btrfs_qgroup_inherit *inherit = NULL;
> ...
> btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_transid(..., &inherit)
> 
> so the current check is very unlikely to be NULL.

But in btrfs_ioctl_snap_create it is called with NULL, so *inherit would
dereference a NULL pointer.

> 
> Second, I don't see anybody freeing pending_snapshot->inherit. I guess
> it should be freed after callin btrfs_qgroup_inherit() and also in
> btrfs_destroy_pending_snapshots().

You're right. In our original version (6f72c7e20dbaea5) it was still
there, in transaction.c. It has been removed in 6fa9700e734:

commit 6fa9700e734275de2acbcb0e99414bd7ddfc60f1
Author: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:   Thu Sep 6 04:00:32 2012 -0600

    Btrfs: fix error path in create_pending_snapshot()

    This patch fixes the following problem:
    - If we failed to deal with the delayed dir items, we should abort
transaction,
      just as its comment said. Fix it.
    - If root reference or root back reference insertion failed, we should
      abort transaction. Fix it.
    - Fix the double free problem of pending->inherit.
    - Do not restore the trans->rsv if we doesn't change it.
    - make the error path more clearly.

    Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>

Miao, can you please explain where you see a double free?

-Arne


> Thanks,
> Alex.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

Re: Leaking btrfs_qgroup_inherit on snapshot creation?

[Miao Xie]

On wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:14:23 +0100, Arne Jansen wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> 
> On 02/06/13 12:18, Alex Lyakas wrote:
>> Hi Jan, Arne,
>> I see this code in create_snapshot:
>>
>> 	if (inherit) {
>> 		pending_snapshot->inherit = *inherit;
>> 		*inherit = NULL;	/* take responsibility to free it */
>> 	}
>>
>> So, first thing I think it should be:
>> if (*inherit)
>> because in btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_v2() we have:
>> struct btrfs_qgroup_inherit *inherit = NULL;
>> ...
>> btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_transid(..., &inherit)
>>
>> so the current check is very unlikely to be NULL.
> 
> But in btrfs_ioctl_snap_create it is called with NULL, so *inherit would
> dereference a NULL pointer.
> 
>>
>> Second, I don't see anybody freeing pending_snapshot->inherit. I guess
>> it should be freed after callin btrfs_qgroup_inherit() and also in
>> btrfs_destroy_pending_snapshots().
> 
> You're right. In our original version (6f72c7e20dbaea5) it was still
> there, in transaction.c. It has been removed in 6fa9700e734:
> 
> commit 6fa9700e734275de2acbcb0e99414bd7ddfc60f1
> Author: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
> Date:   Thu Sep 6 04:00:32 2012 -0600
> 
>     Btrfs: fix error path in create_pending_snapshot()
> 
>     This patch fixes the following problem:
>     - If we failed to deal with the delayed dir items, we should abort
> transaction,
>       just as its comment said. Fix it.
>     - If root reference or root back reference insertion failed, we should
>       abort transaction. Fix it.
>     - Fix the double free problem of pending->inherit.
>     - Do not restore the trans->rsv if we doesn't change it.
>     - make the error path more clearly.
> 
>     Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
> 
> Miao, can you please explain where you see a double free?

Sorry, I misread the code，I didn't notice that the pointer had been assigned
to NULL.

But I think we can make the code more readable and be easy to maintain, we can
free the memory in the caller(btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_v2()) since we are sure
the snapshot creation is done after btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_transid() completes.

Thanks
Miao