From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (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 B4B383B2FC8; Mon, 3 Aug 2026 08:35:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785746145; cv=none; b=hneix6RzSifmmAyzhGPaSa6/mH941+CIntRIXFKDi4M9Lih5OE7DizxafRwkWwm/yCNEjdV0dUM3d3qvlVPnjf4I7NtBdn+1awEkfpm2BkQabGKa5By1sfF7ZsySaRDFfl/bYC/0PtVJ3K1a3eEXWab5hitQZeBXmB2sDY/bYwk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785746145; c=relaxed/simple; bh=yWnjSS9vKXPJ84pKJJ0of6r86pbCS1H32ygisOLc57w=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=WSMZGC8470CG3XPocZpJSrkjBRRqN0xPSe9dZqxE7/IB1N4RQDcs7ToBHQX8vUtR4nhz+3dC/29WZ+FovRvFEbKiCEiYd9YOmwMMolgcpH23OGcZLTNaGVBGezs+3xgxaDCU2eIyoYB1m6QzytXStdUUGJeX1N/LpoQy7XOyQFY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=permerror header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=KEePdZ9q; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=permerror header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="KEePdZ9q" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=6p1m/ojTb6OKIEBFPCad5AVVmbyfw4zU7FwpLGdBjwQ=; t=1785746143; x=1786955743; b=KEePdZ9qnRQzNEv70BUzbcmVxN6coQXvjdsZJKcWlpahrw8 GgpvOkj88YozoCtQf46ystPItaK3dgBvzVWf9GZYsPqALu2jzL7fM/G01SfTPhVHUeWrpwk/O30mp 0NWTxT6puld/jVveX6XXahGUNLSNuA4Gk7t0UsxUmgVBR34Kx8GHzcWQj2GZmbwnQBE/VrcYOhl9z Ws4VqP34+8NczlyTv9s3u3tIPwQJ1V0ySaZVJZswa8xBwOr9YMVGYMkG0/6lZhnjbTLegQvB9+1WX i3fBpDF+4SAyK8UvUxghueLfL+krEoLd9PK4TMqaD7zs23oyglHH0AF6A6i3CNkw==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__ECDSA_SECP256R1_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1wqo96-00000005v8c-1FXW; Mon, 03 Aug 2026 10:35:40 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: brcmfmac: Fix memory leak in brcmf_sdio_read_control() From: Johannes Berg To: Arend van Spriel , Abdun Nihaal Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, brcm80211@lists.linux.dev, brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2026 10:35:39 +0200 In-Reply-To: (sfid-20260803_102116_661427_959202E9) References: <20260722110713.115988-1-nihaal@cse.iitm.ac.in> <20260802083905.3819981-2-arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> <6648c1d61a44ad732550ff20c0b1aecaa43676f6.camel@sipsolutions.net> <19fc626a040.2873.9b12b7fc0a3841636cfb5e919b41b954@broadcom.com> (sfid-20260803_102116_661427_959202E9) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.60.2 (3.60.2-1.fc44) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Mon, 2026-08-03 at 10:21 +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote: > >=20 > > I looked at moving the vfree() to the done: label, but the code also= =20 > > gets there in the success path to wakeup waiters. In the success path= =20 > > the buf is stored for further processing so it should not be freed.=20 Hah, my bad, sorry! > > Maybe better to do: > >=20 > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 spin_unlock_bh(&bus->rxctl_lock); > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 brcmf_sdio_dcmd_resp_wake(bus); > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 return; > >=20 > > fail: > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 vfree(buf); > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 /* Awake any waiters */ > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 brcmf_sdio_dcmd_resp_wake(bus); > > } > Actually it turns out brcmf_sdio_read_control() is only called once so= =20 > the brcmf_sdio_dcmd_resp_wake() can be taken outside the function. Or just something like this? --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/sdio.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/sdio.c @@ -1827,15 +1827,17 @@ brcmf_sdio_read_control(struct brcmf_sdio *bus, u8 = *hdr, uint len, uint doff) if (bus->rxctl) { brcmf_err("last control frame is being processed.\n"); spin_unlock_bh(&bus->rxctl_lock); - vfree(buf); goto done; } bus->rxctl =3D buf + doff; bus->rxctl_orig =3D buf; bus->rxlen =3D len - doff; spin_unlock_bh(&bus->rxctl_lock); + /* buffer is queued */ + buf =3D NULL; =20 done: + vfree(buf); /* Awake any waiters */ brcmf_sdio_dcmd_resp_wake(bus); } It's already using vmalloc() so seems it wouldn't care that much about calling vfree(NULL) on the success path? johannes