From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
To: Zhongqiu Han <quic_zhonhan@quicinc.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org,
mark.rutland@arm.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
jolsa@kernel.org, irogers@google.com, adrian.hunter@intel.com,
kan.liang@linux.intel.com, james.clark@linaro.org,
yangyicong@hisilicon.com, song@kernel.org,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] perf bpf: Fix two memory leakages when calling perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info()
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 14:02:17 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z04uaWQxI3LXfAtg@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241128125432.2748981-4-quic_zhonhan@quicinc.com>
Hello,
On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 08:54:32PM +0800, Zhongqiu Han wrote:
> If perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info() returns false due to a duplicate bpf
> prog info node insertion, the temporary info_node and info_linear memory
> will leak. Add a check to ensure the memory is freed if the function
> returns false.
>
> Fixes: 9c51f8788b5d ("perf env: Avoid recursively taking env->bpf_progs.lock")
> Signed-off-by: Zhongqiu Han <quic_zhonhan@quicinc.com>
> ---
> tools/perf/util/bpf-event.c | 10 ++++++++--
> tools/perf/util/env.c | 7 +++++--
> tools/perf/util/env.h | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/bpf-event.c b/tools/perf/util/bpf-event.c
> index 13608237c50e..c81444059ad0 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/bpf-event.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/bpf-event.c
> @@ -289,7 +289,10 @@ static int perf_event__synthesize_one_bpf_prog(struct perf_session *session,
> }
>
> info_node->info_linear = info_linear;
> - perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(env, info_node);
> + if (!perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(env, info_node)) {
> + free(info_linear);
> + free(info_node);
> + }
> info_linear = NULL;
>
> /*
> @@ -480,7 +483,10 @@ static void perf_env__add_bpf_info(struct perf_env *env, u32 id)
> info_node = malloc(sizeof(struct bpf_prog_info_node));
> if (info_node) {
> info_node->info_linear = info_linear;
> - perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(env, info_node);
> + if (!perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(env, info_node)) {
> + free(info_linear);
> + free(info_node);
> + }
> } else
> free(info_linear);
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/env.c b/tools/perf/util/env.c
> index d7865ae5f8f5..38401a289c24 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/env.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/env.c
> @@ -24,12 +24,15 @@ struct perf_env perf_env;
> #include "bpf-utils.h"
> #include <bpf/libbpf.h>
>
> -void perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(struct perf_env *env,
> +bool perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(struct perf_env *env,
> struct bpf_prog_info_node *info_node)
> {
> + bool ret = true;
Please add a blank line between declaration and the other statements.
Also I think you can just use the return value of the internal function
instead of initializaing it to true.
Thanks,
Namhyung
> down_write(&env->bpf_progs.lock);
> - __perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(env, info_node);
> + if (!__perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(env, info_node))
> + ret = false;
> up_write(&env->bpf_progs.lock);
> + return ret;
> }
>
> bool __perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(struct perf_env *env, struct bpf_prog_info_node *info_node)
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/env.h b/tools/perf/util/env.h
> index 9db2e5a625ed..da11add761d0 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/env.h
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/env.h
> @@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ int perf_env__nr_cpus_avail(struct perf_env *env);
> void perf_env__init(struct perf_env *env);
> bool __perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(struct perf_env *env,
> struct bpf_prog_info_node *info_node);
> -void perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(struct perf_env *env,
> +bool perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info(struct perf_env *env,
> struct bpf_prog_info_node *info_node);
> struct bpf_prog_info_node *perf_env__find_bpf_prog_info(struct perf_env *env,
> __u32 prog_id);
> --
> 2.25.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-02 22:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-28 12:54 [PATCH 0/3] perf tool: Fix multiple memory leakages Zhongqiu Han
2024-11-28 12:54 ` [PATCH 1/3] perf header: Fix one memory leakage in process_bpf_btf() Zhongqiu Han
2024-11-28 12:54 ` [PATCH 2/3] perf header: Fix one memory leakage in process_bpf_prog_info() Zhongqiu Han
2024-11-28 12:54 ` [PATCH 3/3] perf bpf: Fix two memory leakages when calling perf_env__insert_bpf_prog_info() Zhongqiu Han
2024-12-02 22:02 ` Namhyung Kim [this message]
2024-12-03 10:45 ` Zhongqiu Han
2024-12-02 22:04 ` [PATCH 0/3] perf tool: Fix multiple memory leakages Namhyung Kim
2024-12-03 10:41 ` Zhongqiu Han
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=Z04uaWQxI3LXfAtg@google.com \
--to=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=quic_zhonhan@quicinc.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yangyicong@hisilicon.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).