Messages in this thread Patch in this message |  | | Date | Tue, 7 Jan 2020 10:05:11 -0800 | From | Kees Cook <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] fs: pstore: fix double-free on ramoops_init_przs |
| |
On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 02:04:46PM +0300, Cengiz Can wrote: > According to Coverity scanner (CID 1457526) kfree on ram.c:591 frees > label which has already been freed. > > Here's the flow as I have understood (this is my first time reading > pstore's files): > > Whenever `persistent_ram_new` fails, it implicitly calls > `persistent_ram_free(prz)` which already does `kfree(prz->label)` and a > `kfree(prz)` consequently. > > Removed `kfree(label)` to prevent double-free.
I think this is a false positive (have you actually hit the double-free?). The logic in this area is:
label = kmalloc(...) prz[i] = persistent_ram_new(..., label, ...) if (IS_ERR(prz[i])) { kfree(label) while (i > 0) { i--; persistent_ram_free(prz[i]); } }
nothing was freeing the label on the failed prz, but all the other prz labels were free (i.e. there is a "i--" that skips the failed prz alloc).
-Kees
> > Signed-off-by: Cengiz Can <cengiz@kernel.wtf> > --- > fs/pstore/ram.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c > index 487ee39b4..e196aa08f 100644 > --- a/fs/pstore/ram.c > +++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c > @@ -588,7 +588,6 @@ static int ramoops_init_przs(const char *name, > dev_err(dev, "failed to request %s mem region (0x%zx@0x%llx): %d\n", > name, record_size, > (unsigned long long)*paddr, err); > - kfree(label); > > while (i > 0) { > i--; > -- > 2.24.1 >
-- Kees Cook
|  |