Message ID | 20230908040011.2620468-3-ruanjinjie@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
Headers | show |
Series | net: microchip: sparx5: Fix some memory leaks in vcap_api_kunit | expand |
Context | Check | Description |
---|---|---|
netdev/series_format | success | Posting correctly formatted |
netdev/tree_selection | success | Clearly marked for net |
netdev/fixes_present | success | Fixes tag present in non-next series |
netdev/header_inline | success | No static functions without inline keyword in header files |
netdev/build_32bit | success | Errors and warnings before: 9 this patch: 9 |
netdev/cc_maintainers | success | CCed 10 of 10 maintainers |
netdev/build_clang | success | Errors and warnings before: 9 this patch: 9 |
netdev/verify_signedoff | success | Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer |
netdev/deprecated_api | success | None detected |
netdev/check_selftest | success | No net selftest shell script |
netdev/verify_fixes | success | Fixes tag looks correct |
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn | success | Errors and warnings before: 9 this patch: 9 |
netdev/checkpatch | warning | WARNING: line length of 81 exceeds 80 columns |
netdev/kdoc | success | Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0 |
netdev/source_inline | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
> Inject fault while probing kunit-example-test.ko, the field which > is allocated by kzalloc in vcap_rule_add_action() of > vcap_rule_add_action_bit/u32() is not freed, and it cause > the memory leaks below. > > Fixes: c956b9b318d9 ("net: microchip: sparx5: Adding KUNIT tests of key/action values in VCAP API") > Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@huawei.com> > --- > .../net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c > index 2fb0b8cf2b0c..aa79bcf3efc2 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c > @@ -1095,6 +1095,16 @@ static void vcap_api_rule_add_keyvalue_test(struct kunit *test) > vcap_free_ckf(rule); > } > > +static void vcap_free_caf(struct vcap_rule *rule) > +{ > + struct vcap_client_actionfield *caf, *next_caf; > + > + list_for_each_entry_safe(caf, next_caf, &rule->actionfields, ctrl.list) { > + list_del(&caf->ctrl.list); > + kfree(caf); > + } > +} > + Hi Jinjie, It seems like you need to respin anyway, so could you please fix this patch to adhere to the 80 character limit. Checkpatch generates a warning. /Daniel
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c index 2fb0b8cf2b0c..aa79bcf3efc2 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c @@ -1095,6 +1095,16 @@ static void vcap_api_rule_add_keyvalue_test(struct kunit *test) vcap_free_ckf(rule); } +static void vcap_free_caf(struct vcap_rule *rule) +{ + struct vcap_client_actionfield *caf, *next_caf; + + list_for_each_entry_safe(caf, next_caf, &rule->actionfields, ctrl.list) { + list_del(&caf->ctrl.list); + kfree(caf); + } +} + static void vcap_api_rule_add_actionvalue_test(struct kunit *test) { struct vcap_admin admin = { @@ -1120,6 +1130,7 @@ static void vcap_api_rule_add_actionvalue_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, VCAP_AF_POLICE_ENA, af->ctrl.action); KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, VCAP_FIELD_BIT, af->ctrl.type); KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0x0, af->data.u1.value); + vcap_free_caf(rule); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rule->actionfields); ret = vcap_rule_add_action_bit(rule, VCAP_AF_POLICE_ENA, VCAP_BIT_1); @@ -1131,6 +1142,7 @@ static void vcap_api_rule_add_actionvalue_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, VCAP_AF_POLICE_ENA, af->ctrl.action); KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, VCAP_FIELD_BIT, af->ctrl.type); KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0x1, af->data.u1.value); + vcap_free_caf(rule); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rule->actionfields); ret = vcap_rule_add_action_bit(rule, VCAP_AF_POLICE_ENA, VCAP_BIT_ANY); @@ -1142,6 +1154,7 @@ static void vcap_api_rule_add_actionvalue_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, VCAP_AF_POLICE_ENA, af->ctrl.action); KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, VCAP_FIELD_BIT, af->ctrl.type); KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0x0, af->data.u1.value); + vcap_free_caf(rule); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rule->actionfields); ret = vcap_rule_add_action_u32(rule, VCAP_AF_TYPE, 0x98765432); @@ -1153,6 +1166,7 @@ static void vcap_api_rule_add_actionvalue_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, VCAP_AF_TYPE, af->ctrl.action); KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, VCAP_FIELD_U32, af->ctrl.type); KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0x98765432, af->data.u32.value); + vcap_free_caf(rule); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rule->actionfields); ret = vcap_rule_add_action_u32(rule, VCAP_AF_MASK_MODE, 0xaabbccdd); @@ -1164,6 +1178,7 @@ static void vcap_api_rule_add_actionvalue_test(struct kunit *test) KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, VCAP_AF_MASK_MODE, af->ctrl.action); KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, VCAP_FIELD_U32, af->ctrl.type); KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, 0xaabbccdd, af->data.u32.value); + vcap_free_caf(rule); } static void vcap_api_rule_find_keyset_basic_test(struct kunit *test)
Inject fault while probing kunit-example-test.ko, the field which is allocated by kzalloc in vcap_rule_add_action() of vcap_rule_add_action_bit/u32() is not freed, and it cause the memory leaks below. unreferenced object 0xffff0276c496b300 (size 64): comm "kunit_try_catch", pid 286, jiffies 4294894224 (age 920.072s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 68 3c 62 82 00 80 ff ff 68 3c 62 82 00 80 ff ff h<b.....h<b..... 3c 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 <............... backtrace: [<0000000028f08898>] slab_post_alloc_hook+0xb8/0x368 [<00000000514b9b37>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x174/0x290 [<000000004620684a>] kmalloc_trace+0x40/0x164 [<000000008b41c84d>] vcap_rule_add_action+0x104/0x178 [<00000000ae66c16c>] vcap_api_rule_add_actionvalue_test+0xa4/0x990 [<00000000fcc5326c>] kunit_try_run_case+0x50/0xac [<00000000f5f45b20>] kunit_generic_run_threadfn_adapter+0x20/0x2c [<0000000026284079>] kthread+0x124/0x130 [<0000000024d4a996>] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 unreferenced object 0xffff0276c496b2c0 (size 64): comm "kunit_try_catch", pid 286, jiffies 4294894224 (age 920.072s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 68 3c 62 82 00 80 ff ff 68 3c 62 82 00 80 ff ff h<b.....h<b..... 3c 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 <............... backtrace: [<0000000028f08898>] slab_post_alloc_hook+0xb8/0x368 [<00000000514b9b37>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x174/0x290 [<000000004620684a>] kmalloc_trace+0x40/0x164 [<000000008b41c84d>] vcap_rule_add_action+0x104/0x178 [<00000000607782aa>] vcap_api_rule_add_actionvalue_test+0x100/0x990 [<00000000fcc5326c>] kunit_try_run_case+0x50/0xac [<00000000f5f45b20>] kunit_generic_run_threadfn_adapter+0x20/0x2c [<0000000026284079>] kthread+0x124/0x130 [<0000000024d4a996>] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 unreferenced object 0xffff0276c496b280 (size 64): comm "kunit_try_catch", pid 286, jiffies 4294894224 (age 920.072s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 68 3c 62 82 00 80 ff ff 68 3c 62 82 00 80 ff ff h<b.....h<b..... 3c 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 <............... backtrace: [<0000000028f08898>] slab_post_alloc_hook+0xb8/0x368 [<00000000514b9b37>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x174/0x290 [<000000004620684a>] kmalloc_trace+0x40/0x164 [<000000008b41c84d>] vcap_rule_add_action+0x104/0x178 [<000000004e640602>] vcap_api_rule_add_actionvalue_test+0x15c/0x990 [<00000000fcc5326c>] kunit_try_run_case+0x50/0xac [<00000000f5f45b20>] kunit_generic_run_threadfn_adapter+0x20/0x2c [<0000000026284079>] kthread+0x124/0x130 [<0000000024d4a996>] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 unreferenced object 0xffff0276c496b240 (size 64): comm "kunit_try_catch", pid 286, jiffies 4294894224 (age 920.092s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 68 3c 62 82 00 80 ff ff 68 3c 62 82 00 80 ff ff h<b.....h<b..... 5a 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 32 54 76 98 00 00 00 00 Z.......2Tv..... backtrace: [<0000000028f08898>] slab_post_alloc_hook+0xb8/0x368 [<00000000514b9b37>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x174/0x290 [<000000004620684a>] kmalloc_trace+0x40/0x164 [<000000008b41c84d>] vcap_rule_add_action+0x104/0x178 [<0000000011141bf8>] vcap_api_rule_add_actionvalue_test+0x1bc/0x990 [<00000000fcc5326c>] kunit_try_run_case+0x50/0xac [<00000000f5f45b20>] kunit_generic_run_threadfn_adapter+0x20/0x2c [<0000000026284079>] kthread+0x124/0x130 [<0000000024d4a996>] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 unreferenced object 0xffff0276c496b200 (size 64): comm "kunit_try_catch", pid 286, jiffies 4294894224 (age 920.092s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 68 3c 62 82 00 80 ff ff 68 3c 62 82 00 80 ff ff h<b.....h<b..... 28 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 dd cc bb aa 00 00 00 00 (............... backtrace: [<0000000028f08898>] slab_post_alloc_hook+0xb8/0x368 [<00000000514b9b37>] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x174/0x290 [<000000004620684a>] kmalloc_trace+0x40/0x164 [<000000008b41c84d>] vcap_rule_add_action+0x104/0x178 [<00000000d5ed3088>] vcap_api_rule_add_actionvalue_test+0x22c/0x990 [<00000000fcc5326c>] kunit_try_run_case+0x50/0xac [<00000000f5f45b20>] kunit_generic_run_threadfn_adapter+0x20/0x2c [<0000000026284079>] kthread+0x124/0x130 [<0000000024d4a996>] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 Fixes: c956b9b318d9 ("net: microchip: sparx5: Adding KUNIT tests of key/action values in VCAP API") Signed-off-by: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@huawei.com> --- .../net/ethernet/microchip/vcap/vcap_api_kunit.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)