Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] bluetooth: hci_h5: fix memory leak in h5_close | From | Hans de Goede <> | Date | Mon, 5 Oct 2020 11:18:44 +0200 |
| |
Hi,
On 10/4/20 7:17 AM, Anant Thazhemadam wrote: > When h5_close() is called and !hu->serdev, h5 is directly freed. > However, h5->rx_skb is not freed before h5 is freed, which causes > a memory leak. > Freeing h5->rx_skb (when !hu->serdev) fixes this memory leak before > freeing h5. > > Fixes: ce945552fde4 ("Bluetooth: hci_h5: Add support for serdev enumerated devices") > Reported-by: syzbot+6ce141c55b2f7aafd1c4@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > Tested-by: syzbot+6ce141c55b2f7aafd1c4@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > Signed-off-by: Anant Thazhemadam <anant.thazhemadam@gmail.com> > --- > Changes in v3: > * Free h5->rx_skb when !hu->serdev, and fix the memory leak > * Do not incorrectly and unnecessarily call serdev_device_close() > > Changes in v2: > * Fixed the Fixes tag > > Hans de Goede also suggested calling h5_reset_rx() on close (for both, !hu->serdev > and hu->serdev cases). > However, doing so seems to lead to a null-ptr-dereference error, > https://syzkaller.appspot.com/text?tag=CrashReport&x=136a9a5d900000, > and for this reason, it has not been implemented. > > Instead, directly freeing h5->rx_skb seems to suffice in preventing the memory leak > reported. > And since h5 is freed immediately after freeing h5->rx_skb, assigning h5->rx_skb to > be NULL isn't necessary. > > drivers/bluetooth/hci_h5.c | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_h5.c b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_h5.c > index e41854e0d79a..171e55c080ce 100644 > --- a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_h5.c > +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_h5.c > @@ -248,8 +248,10 @@ static int h5_close(struct hci_uart *hu) > if (h5->vnd && h5->vnd->close) > h5->vnd->close(h5); > > - if (!hu->serdev) > + if (!hu->serdev){ > + kfree_skb(h5->rx_skb); > kfree(h5); > + } > > return 0; > } >
To fully fix the memleak you also need to add a kfree_skb(h5->rx_skb); call to the end of h5_serdev_remove(), because in the hu->serdev case that is where the h5 struct will be free-ed (it is free-ed after that function exits).
Regards,
Hans
| |