lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Re: [PATCH] fix memory leak on kvm_vm_ioctl_create_spapr_tce
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:38:37PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 10:02:20PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 04:06:24PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> >
> > > It seems to me that it would be better to do the anon_inode_getfd()
> > > call before the kvm_get_kvm() call, and go to the fail label if it
> > > fails.
> >
> > And what happens if another thread does close() on the (guessed) fd?
>
> Chaos ensues, but mostly because we don't have proper mutual exclusion
> on the modifications to the list. I'll add a mutex_lock/unlock to
> kvm_spapr_tce_release() and move the anon_inode_getfd() call inside
> the mutex.
>
> It looks like the other possible uses of the fd (mmap, and passing it
> as a parameter to the KVM_DEV_VFIO_GROUP_SET_SPAPR_TCE ioctl on a KVM
> device fd) are safe.

Frankly, it's a lot saner to have "no failure points past anon_inode_getfd()"
policy...

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-28 07:29    [W:0.068 / U:0.412 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site