[PATCH net v2] idpf: Fix vport IRQ name leak on request failure

[PATCH net v2] idpf: Fix vport IRQ name leak on request failure

[Yuho Choi]

idpf_vport_intr_req_irq() allocates a name for each vector IRQ before
calling request_irq(). On success, the name is released later through
kfree(free_irq()), but when request_irq() fails, the error path only
unwinds the previous vectors and the name for the failed one is leaked.

Free the allocated name on the request_irq() failure path, as done for
the mailbox IRQ in commit 9bff30482c10 ("idpf: Fix mailbox IRQ name leak
on request failure"). While at it, fail with -ENOMEM when the name
cannot be allocated instead of requesting the IRQ without a name.

Fixes: d4d558718266 ("idpf: initialize interrupts and enable vport")
Signed-off-by: Yuho Choi <oss.patchbox@gmail.com>
---
Changes in v2:
- Correct the Fixes: tag (Simon Horman)
- Handle kasprintf() failure (Simon Horman)

v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260923234819.702327-1-oss.patchbox@gmail.com/

Compile-tested only (x86_64 defconfig + CONFIG_IDPF=m, W=1).

 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c
index 4311ffa30bb1..af3213eae393 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c
@@ -4067,12 +4067,17 @@ static int idpf_vport_intr_req_irq(struct idpf_vport *vport,
 
 		name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s-%s-%s-%d", drv_name, if_name,
 				 vec_name, vector);
+		if (!name) {
+			err = -ENOMEM;
+			goto free_q_irqs;
+		}
 
 		err = request_irq(irq_num, idpf_vport_intr_clean_queues, 0,
 				  name, q_vector);
 		if (err) {
 			netdev_err(vport->netdev,
 				   "Request_irq failed, error: %d\n", err);
+			kfree(name);
 			goto free_q_irqs;
 		}
 

base-commit: 551c722f40809618230001baccf219193e22fc5a
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH net v2] idpf: Fix vport IRQ name leak on request failure

[netdev-bot+sinfo]

Hi!

This is an automated message. This series looks like a fix, but its
commit messages seem to be missing some information:

 - How the issue was discovered, e.g. hit in production, hit during
   development, syzbot report, manual code inspection, LLM or static
   analysis tool scan.

Please do not repost the series just to address the above. Instead,
reply to this email with the missing information, so that reviewers
can take it into account. If the series needs another revision for
other reasons, please include the information in the commit messages
then.

The evaluation is done by an LLM so it may be wrong, if you think
that is the case please reply and explain.