From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFADD2EEE68; Wed, 17 Jun 2026 22:30:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781735459; cv=none; b=MOBpEY4zDGJmkb5x5KM/nRR+DoZrfIGE0vgocJSoSfagXPXMAjkjQelIbpVBVOYQsuojj9KJFdlwlOSqt5IGomebiGPig8okYgBZzkNfC+mi5VQkOo3qXB32neTtCeENVj6YrgU/o+AL+SJr4k9/GJgbZUrp7LL92jQ5U905d1E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781735459; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Ix5IqDnIc6LqNbWylW/sj3UnwyPoCxbyCegDUzuVC5Q=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=INZALjX8y4Y2vJbQMeNGkEx06/72BhM1fe7wN0fX5mG1tfc9uZEIbjmZKq9QXb/HnyQJBCYrtngubJHBBJApDvw7uJ9sxBa9Rek+/xSWjPUwTL0GiE8SUbklogaVsF7I0rei4IUnd3orjuCWZbW1dd35EhoMbSpwSVvTCBezaHs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=J3KdhQeJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="J3KdhQeJ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 00B741F000E9; Wed, 17 Jun 2026 22:30:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1781735458; bh=E5oop4TgsnZNMoD4GFdU48MAJHaPqsNP5SYe53mN4XI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=J3KdhQeJIW3JD4Eb5Wn7WYwq2dcQooTmOMjA9JFDrbW2yZ/Xn/gMqExnzHgw2FOIw qKLvHrG1F3sCTX+dfmsa69odAXCzrAVWVOlpkofK8jIKOiE4djJptXyXXOKXB0T01z ihGVbrYAQf1jmy16T6iImgarvnb+t94VDkr+MnLerdLlOyDoZrl8ii+MQD8+jiGTGZ DPYtChJyMhTGGp3qWZIJovGCY0Y0zUkKvIg8QC3WmW1liResKLp1g5w4ETZl1q/ifa ZpzOCehHaCCG8LjAgRS5zA54PR0mfy18D84AnGnhSHX3YpyiYdim4vebiCeBUestrD c7mVo8LsEPFEg== Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2026 15:30:54 -0700 From: Nathan Chancellor To: Robertus Diawan Chris Cc: nsc@kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, me@brighamcampbell.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] modpost: release allocation when early return no suffix .o in read_symbols() Message-ID: <20260617223054.GA3913876@ax162> References: <20260610052550.187006-1-robertusdchris@gmail.com> <178167011232.2064238.5669414796099955471.b4-review@b4> <20260617214635.GA4766@soyboi> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260617214635.GA4766@soyboi> Hi Robertus, On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 04:46:35AM +0700, Robertus Diawan Chris wrote: > On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 09:21:52PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Jun 2026 12:25:50 +0700, Robertus Diawan Chris wrote: > > > diff --git a/scripts/mod/modpost.c b/scripts/mod/modpost.c > > > index abbcd3fc1394..8e231544f9f3 100644 > > > --- a/scripts/mod/modpost.c > > > +++ b/scripts/mod/modpost.c > > > @@ -1585,6 +1585,7 @@ static void read_symbols(const char *modname) > > > > > > if (!strends(modname, ".o")) { > > > error("%s: filename must be suffixed with .o\n", modname); > > > + parse_elf_finish(&info); > > > return; > > > } > > > > > > > Thanks for the patch! While this change appears to be correct, would > > moving the strends() if block before the parse_elf() one resolve this as > > well? > > Yes, moving the strends() if block before the parse_elf() also resolve > this too. The reason I didn't do that because I am still not sure if > changing the order will have any effect. I already take a look at the > code and it looks like strends() if block and the parse_elf() didn't > depends on each other, but just in case I missed something, I decided > not to change the execution order and just add parse_elf_finish(). Yeah, I can definitely see why you went the route that you did. > > I think I would prefer going that route because neither check really > > depends on the other and we have to think less about unwinding > > with the checks flipped. > > Now that you already confirm that neither check depends on each other, I > am more confident to take this approach. Sounds good to me! > > Furthermore, modpost is a relatively short running host utility, so > > I don't really think it is worth optimizing for resource leaks like > > this. > > I want to confirm something first, do you mind if I send v2 patch with > the change of moving strends() if block before parse_elf() in > read_symbols()? I mean, if you feel like this is unnecessary, I will > drop this patch. I don't mind either way. I do not mind taking patches that silence static checker warnings when they are either small or do not make the code much more complicated to understand. I think this change would satisfy both of those points, so feel free to send a v2. I just do not see these type of fixes as high priority. -- Cheers, Nathan