From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] mem: fix potential resource leak Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 16:49:03 +0100 Message-ID: References: <36228cdd42eef261936b07c42a3c582f7e715da1.1524650130.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com> <20180427152116.GE80648@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, thomas@monjalon.net To: Bruce Richardson Return-path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 812197D19 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2018 17:49:07 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <20180427152116.GE80648@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 27-Apr-18 4:21 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 10:56:43AM +0100, Anatoly Burakov wrote: >> Normally, tailq entry should have a valid fd by the time we attempt >> to map the segment. However, in case it doesn't, we're leaking fd, >> so fix it. >> >> Coverity issue: 272570 >> >> Fixes: 2a04139f66b4 ("eal: add single file segments option") >> Cc: anatoly.burakov@intel.com >> >> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov >> --- >> lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memalloc.c | 2 ++ >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memalloc.c b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memalloc.c >> index fab5a98..b02e3a5 100644 >> --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memalloc.c >> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memalloc.c >> @@ -524,6 +524,8 @@ alloc_seg(struct rte_memseg *ms, void *addr, int socket_id, >> if (te != NULL && te->fd >= 0) { >> close(te->fd); >> te->fd = -1; > > Is "fd" still not being leaked here, since we won't hit the else case and > then jump to the end of the function where it goes out of scope? Technically, the "else" case is never valid here. If we have a tailq entry - we always have a valid fd. So perhaps it should be classified as a false positive. -- Thanks, Anatoly