possible memory leak in commands/nand.c?
Sascha Hauer
s.hauer at pengutronix.de
Mon Dec 21 05:16:01 EST 2009
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 04:17:29AM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009, Sascha Hauer wrote:
>
> ... snip ...
>
> > Yes, indeed, that's a memory hole here. The following should fix
> > this. Thanks for noting.
> >
> > Sascha
> >
> >
> > >From 4e4b03cd61808383a98cb1d10a47025e1909e0bd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer at pengutronix.de>
> > Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 09:41:52 +0100
> > Subject: [PATCH] commands/nand.c: Fix memory hole
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer at pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> > commands/nand.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++-----
> > 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/commands/nand.c b/commands/nand.c
> > index cbf1058..55b89af 100644
> > --- a/commands/nand.c
> > +++ b/commands/nand.c
> > @@ -224,31 +224,37 @@ static struct file_operations nand_bb_ops = {
> > int dev_add_bb_dev(char *path, const char *name)
> > {
> > struct nand_bb *bb;
> > - int ret;
> > + int ret = -ENOMEM;
> > struct stat s;
> >
> > bb = xzalloc(sizeof(*bb));
> > bb->devname = asprintf("/dev/%s", basename(path));
> > + if (!bb->devname)
> > + goto out1;
> > +
> > if (name)
> > bb->cdev.name = strdup(name);
> > else
> > bb->cdev.name = asprintf("%s.bb", basename(path));
> >
> > + if (!bb->cdev.name)
> > + goto out2;
> > +
> > ret = stat(bb->devname, &s);
> > if (ret)
> > - goto free_out;
> > + goto out3;
> >
> > bb->raw_size = s.st_size;
> >
> > bb->fd = open(bb->devname, O_RDWR);
> > if (bb->fd < 0) {
> > ret = -ENODEV;
> > - goto free_out;
> > + goto out3;
> > }
> >
> > ret = ioctl(bb->fd, MEMGETINFO, &bb->info);
> > if (ret)
> > - goto free_out;
> > + goto out4;
> >
> > nand_bb_calc_size(bb);
> > bb->cdev.ops = &nand_bb_ops;
> > @@ -258,7 +264,13 @@ int dev_add_bb_dev(char *path, const char *name)
> >
> > return 0;
> >
> > -free_out:
> > +out4:
> > + close(bb->fd);
> > +out3:
> > + free(bb->cdev.name);
> > +out2:
> > + free(bb->devname);
> > +out1:
> > free(bb);
> > return ret;
> > }
>
> i'm not sure this required distinguishing between every one of those
> cases since the initial space was allocated with xzalloc(),
> guaranteeing it would be zero-filled, and freeing a NULL pointer is
> supposed to be a no-op.
>
> so it would have been simpler to just
>
> free(bb->devname); # might be NULL, no problem
> free(bb->cdev.name); # same here
> free(bb);
Yes, you're right. OTOH we probably do not save anything by removing
the different jump labels.
Sascha
>
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
More information about the barebox
mailing list