lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] udc: Memory leak on error path and use after free
On Wed, 16 Aug 2017, Anton Vasilyev wrote:

> On 16.08.2017 18:29, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Aug 2017, Anton Vasilyev wrote:
> >
> >> gadget_release() is responsible for cleanup dev memory.
> >> But if net2280_probe() fails after dev allocation, then
> >> gadget_release() become unregistered and dev memory leaks.
> >
> > This isn't needed if usb_add_gadget_udc_release() is fixed, right?
> >
>
> No, this situation could appear before call
> usb_add_gadget_udc_release().
>
> >> Also net2280_remove() calls usb_del_gadget_udc() which
> >> perform schedule_delayed_work() with gadget_release(), so
> >> it is possible that dev will be deallocated exactly after
> >> this call and leads to use after free.
> >
> > Where is there a possible use after free?
> >
>
> net2280_remove() continue work with struct net2280 *dev after call
> usb_del_gadget_udc(&dev->gadget), but this net2280 *dev could be
> deallocated by gadget_release()
>
> >> The patch moves deallocation from gadget_release() to
> >> net2280_remove().
> >
> > Alan Stern

Okay, now I understand what you were saying. Yes, I agree, the
existing code isn't right.

But a better solution would be to move the usb_del_gadget_udc() call
from the beginning of net2280_remove() to the end. And make the call
conditional, depending on whether usb_add_gadget_udc_release() has
already been called successfully.

The point is that the device core does not allow drivers to deallocate
memory containing a struct device before the ->release callback has
been invoked. Your patch might do that, if the release was delayed for
some reason.

Alan Stern

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-16 18:36    [W:0.032 / U:4.820 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site