public inbox for linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Chen, Zide" <zide.chen@intel.com>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>,
	linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: lkp@intel.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	Thomas Falcon <thomas.falcon@intel.com>,
	Xudong Hao <xudong.hao@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Fix iounmap() leak on global_init failure
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2026 11:41:06 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e7d74d9d-cb45-4f5f-8e44-502dd7c4bcff@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <77078fe5-23fa-4278-b32f-f655f0760be1@web.de>



On 1/13/2026 11:51 PM, Markus Elfring wrote:
>>>> If domain->global_init() fails in __parse_discovery_table(), the
>>>> mapped MMIO region is not released before returning, resulting in
>>>> an iounmap() leak.
>>>
>>> How do you think about to avoid a bit of duplicate source code here?
>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst?h=v6.19-rc5#n526
>>
>> Thank you for the suggestion!
>>
>> Yes, I agree this is better.
> 
> Thanks for this positive feedback.
> 
> 
>> In V1 I followed the existing style in this API.
> 
> This variant might be nicer for backporting.
> 
> 
>> I will post a v2 with this change:
>>
>> @@ -264,6 +264,7 @@ static int __parse_discovery_table(struct
>> uncore_discovery_domain *domain,
>>         struct uncore_unit_discovery unit;
>>         void __iomem *io_addr;
>>         unsigned long size;
>> +       int ret = 0;
>>         int i;
> 
> Would scope adjustments become helpful for any of these local vartiables?

Yes, I agree that moving int i into the for loop would be better, but
I’d prefer to keep this patch focused and leave that change for future
cleanup.


> 
>>         size = UNCORE_DISCOVERY_GLOBAL_MAP_SIZE;
>> @@ -273,21 +274,23 @@ static int __parse_discovery_table(struct
> …
>> -       if (domain->global_init && domain->global_init(global.ctl))
>> -               return -ENODEV;
>> +       if (domain->global_init && domain->global_init(global.ctl)) {
>> +               ret = -ENODEV;
>> +               goto out;
>> +       }
> …
>>         *parsed = true;
>> +
>> +out:
> 
> Would an other label be a bit clearer here?
> 
> unmap_io:

It seems that the perf driver generally uses simple labels such as done,
out, or err.  Additionally, since there is only a single error path
here, I would prefer to keep the label out for style consistency.

> 
>>         iounmap(io_addr);
>> -       return 0;
>> +       return ret;
>>  }
>>
>>  static int parse_discovery_table(struct uncore_discovery_domain
>>
>>> See also once more:
>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.19-rc5#n94
> 
> Will another imperative wording become helpful for an improved change description?

Sure, I’ll try my best to improve the description.

>> Are you suggesting that I add a Closes tag?
> 
> It depends …
> 
> 
>> This issue was reported by Intel internal LKP, and there is no public
>> URL available.
> 
> Thanks for such a bit of background information.
> Some contributors would appreciate further hints on involved development tools
> (and known source code analysis approaches).

I may add the following report to the commit message for additional context:

    Unverified Error/Warning (likely false positive, kindly check if
    interested):
        arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_discovery.c:293:2-8:
        ERROR: missing iounmap; ioremap on line 288 and execution via
        conditional on line 292

> Regards,
> Markus


      reply	other threads:[~2026-01-14 19:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-01-13  0:25 [PATCH] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Fix iounmap() leak on global_init failure Zide Chen
2026-01-13  0:48 ` Mi, Dapeng
2026-01-13 16:21 ` Markus Elfring
2026-01-13 22:04   ` Chen, Zide
2026-01-14  7:25     ` Markus Elfring
2026-01-14  7:51     ` Markus Elfring
2026-01-14 19:41       ` Chen, Zide [this message]

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=e7d74d9d-cb45-4f5f-8e44-502dd7c4bcff@intel.com \
    --to=zide.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=thomas.falcon@intel.com \
    --cc=xudong.hao@intel.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