From: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
To: WenTao Liang <vulab@iscas.ac.cn>
Cc: parthiban.veerasooran@microchip.com,
christian.gromm@microchip.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
hverkuil+cisco@kernel.org,
laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com, s9430939@naver.com,
kees@kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: most: video: fix refcount leak in comp_probe_channel()
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 15:48:11 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aiquiwEtXTmSpyJf@stanley.mountain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260611114335.77216-1-vulab@iscas.ac.cn>
On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 07:43:35PM +0800, WenTao Liang wrote:
> If v4l2_device_register() fails in comp_probe_channel(), the
> function frees the allocated mdev with kfree() without releasing the
> reference count held by the embedded v4l2_device. Because
> v4l2_device_register() initializes a kref in the v4l2_device, the
> reference count is already 1 on failure. Dropping the last reference
> must be done with v4l2_device_put() so that the release callback can
> unregister the v4l2_device and free mdev.
What are you talking about here?
kref_init(&v4l2_dev->ref);
This is just a "refcount = 1" assignment. There is no allocation or
need to free anything.
>
> Replace the kfree(mdev) with v4l2_device_put(&mdev->v4l2_dev). The
> error path for comp_register_videodev() failure already does this
> correctly.
This is a weird and confusing to say. In comp_register_videodev()
we call video_device_release() which is a wrapper around kfree() and
here the original code calls kfree() directly... The original code
is more similar to comp_register_videodev() than the new code.
>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
CCing stable isn't necessary since v4l2_device_register() can't actually
fail here in real life.
drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-device.c
17 int v4l2_device_register(struct device *dev, struct v4l2_device *v4l2_dev)
18 {
19 if (v4l2_dev == NULL)
v4l2_dev is non-NULL.
20 return -EINVAL;
21
22 INIT_LIST_HEAD(&v4l2_dev->subdevs);
23 spin_lock_init(&v4l2_dev->lock);
24 v4l2_prio_init(&v4l2_dev->prio);
25 kref_init(&v4l2_dev->ref);
26 get_device(dev);
27 v4l2_dev->dev = dev;
28 if (dev == NULL) {
dev is NULL
29 /* If dev == NULL, then name must be filled in by the caller */
30 if (WARN_ON(!v4l2_dev->name[0]))
The name is filled in.
31 return -EINVAL;
32 return 0;
^^^^^^^^
We return success.
33 }
> Fixes: 3d31c0cb6c12 ("Staging: most: add MOST driver's aim-v4l2 module")
> Signed-off-by: WenTao Liang <vulab@iscas.ac.cn>
Please put in the commit message if this that this was discovered via AI
and not tested or whatever...
> ---
> drivers/staging/most/video/video.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/most/video/video.c b/drivers/staging/most/video/video.c
> index 04351f8ccccf..aa846959b217 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/most/video/video.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/most/video/video.c
> @@ -491,7 +491,7 @@ static int comp_probe_channel(struct most_interface *iface, int channel_idx,
> ret = v4l2_device_register(NULL, &mdev->v4l2_dev);
> if (ret) {
> pr_err("v4l2_device_register() failed\n");
> - kfree(mdev);
> + v4l2_device_put(&mdev->v4l2_dev);
v4l2_device_put() will call comp_v4l2_dev_release() which is calls:
v4l2_device_unregister(v4l2_dev);
kfree(mdev);
The call to v4l2_device_unregister() is a no-op since the register
failed (pretending that were possible) so at runtime this is the exact
same as calling kfree(mdev);
So this is not a bug. The original code is fine. We could argue
about readability, but I feel like the original code is in some ways
more readable. I don't like calling unregister() when the device
is not registered.
regards,
dan carpenter
> return ret;
> }
>
> --
> 2.50.1 (Apple Git-155)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-11 12:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-11 11:43 [PATCH] staging: most: video: fix refcount leak in comp_probe_channel() WenTao Liang
2026-06-11 12:48 ` Dan Carpenter [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=aiquiwEtXTmSpyJf@stanley.mountain \
--to=error27@gmail.com \
--cc=christian.gromm@microchip.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hverkuil+cisco@kernel.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=parthiban.veerasooran@microchip.com \
--cc=s9430939@naver.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vulab@iscas.ac.cn \
/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