LKML Archive on
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Tobin C. Harding" <>
To: Nikolay Borisov <>
Cc: "Tobin C. Harding" <>, Chris Mason <>,
	Josef Bacik <>,
	David Sterba <>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fs: btrfs: Don't leak memory when failing add fsid
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 20:57:20 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190513105720.GB15053@eros.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 09:04:49AM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> On 13.05.19 г. 6:39 ч., Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> > A failed call to kobject_init_and_add() must be followed by a call to
> > kobject_put().  Currently in the error path when adding fs_devices we
> > are missing this call.  This could be fixed by calling
> > btrfs_sysfs_remove_fsid() if btrfs_sysfs_add_fsid() returns an error or
> > by adding a call to kobject_put() directly in btrfs_sysfs_add_fsid().
> > Here we choose the second option because it prevents the slightly
> > unusual error path handling requirements of kobject from leaking out
> > into btrfs functions.
> > 
> > Add a call to kobject_put() in the error path of kobject_add_and_init().
> > This causes the release method to be called if kobject_init_and_add()
> > fails.  open_tree() is the function that calls btrfs_sysfs_add_fsid()
> > and the error code in this function is already written with the
> > assumption that the release method is called during the error path of
> > open_tree() (as seen by the call to btrfs_sysfs_remove_fsid() under the
> > fail_fsdev_sysfs label).
> I'm not familiar with the internals of kobject but
> btrfs_sysfs_remove_fsid calls __btrfs_sysfs_remove_fsid which in turn
> does kobject_del followed by kobject_put so its sequence is not exactly
> identical with your change. Presumably kobject_del is only required if
> you want to dispose of successfully registered sysfs node. This implies
> that __btrfs_sysfs_remove_fsid is actually broken when it comes to
> handling failed sysfs_add_fsid?

kobject_del() is not technically required in __btrfs_sysfs_remove_fsid()
since if kobject_put() drops the reference count to 0 and kobject_del()
has not been called then the kobject infrastructure will call
kobject_del() for us (and we get a pr_debug() message).  The code
sequence is correct although not _exactly_ written as the kobject
authors intended (I am not one of those authors, I'm just learning).

Thanks for looking at this.


  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-13 10:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-13  3:39 [PATCH 0/2] Fix kobject error path memleaks Tobin C. Harding
2019-05-13  3:39 ` [PATCH 1/2] fs: btrfs: Fix error path kobject memory leak Tobin C. Harding
2019-05-13  5:59   ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-05-13  7:11     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-05-13  3:39 ` [PATCH 2/2] fs: btrfs: Don't leak memory when failing add fsid Tobin C. Harding
2019-05-13  6:04   ` Nikolay Borisov
2019-05-13 10:57     ` Tobin C. Harding [this message]
2019-05-13  7:12   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-05-13 17:47 ` [PATCH 0/2] Fix kobject error path memleaks David Sterba

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190513105720.GB15053@eros.localdomain \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 2/2] fs: btrfs: Don'\''t leak memory when failing add fsid' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).