From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from top.free-electrons.com ([176.31.233.9] helo=mail.free-electrons.com) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1V8vti-0000AT-Fg for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:27:15 +0000 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 14:26:50 -0300 From: Ezequiel Garcia To: Nilanjan Roychowdhury Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mtd: mtdoops: fix for a potential memory leak in mtdoops_notify_remove Message-ID: <20130812172649.GB7198@localhost> References: <1376251908-7451-1-git-send-email-nilanjan.roychowdhury@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1376251908-7451-1-git-send-email-nilanjan.roychowdhury@gmail.com> Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, David Woodhouse , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 01:11:48PM -0700, Nilanjan Roychowdhury wrote: > we are allocating cxt->oops_page_used using vmalloc in mtdoops_notify_add for > every mtd_info addition but not freeing it in mtdoops_notify_remove > > Signed-off-by: Nilanjan Roychowdhury > --- > drivers/mtd/mtdoops.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdoops.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdoops.c > index 97bb8f6..02f49aa 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdoops.c > +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdoops.c > @@ -386,6 +386,7 @@ static void mtdoops_notify_remove(struct mtd_info *mtd) > cxt->mtd = NULL; > flush_work(&cxt->work_erase); > flush_work(&cxt->work_write); > + vfree(cxt->oops_page_used); > } > > -- > 1.7.9.5 > Have you tested this patch doing an unregister/module remove cycle? I'm not entirely sure, but I *think* you must also remove the vfree(cxt->oops_page_used); at mtdoops_exit(). Otherwise, you might call vfree() twice, the second time on a garbage pointer. The reason for this is that the unregister_mtd_user(&mtdoops_notifier); call in mtdoops_exit() will call the .remove callback (causing the first vfree() with this patch) and then call vfree() for the second time, explicitly. -- Ezequiel GarcĂ­a, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com