mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@kernel.org>
To: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>
Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
	Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@samsung.com>,
	linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] module: Fix memory deallocation on error path in move_module()
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2025 11:47:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <732dedee-c7c5-4226-ad87-f4c2311b11b3@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <97f26140-bf53-4c4d-bf63-2dd353a3ec85@suse.com>

> Do you mean the following, or something else:
> 
> static int move_module(struct module *mod, struct load_info *info)
> {
> 	int i;
> 	enum mod_mem_type t = MOD_MEM_NUM_TYPES;
> 	int ret;
> 	bool codetag_section_found = false;
> 
> 	for_each_mod_mem_type(type) {
> 		if (!mod->mem[type].size) {
> 			mod->mem[type].base = NULL;
> 			continue;
> 		}
> 
> 		ret = module_memory_alloc(mod, type);
> 		if (ret) {
> 			t = type;
> 			goto out_err;
> 		}
> 	}
> 
> 	[...]
> }
> 

Yes, that's it. From your patch, moving MOD_MEM_NUM_TYPE assigment to the
initialization and use the while() loop suggested later on.

One thing though, we are "releasing" the memory even if we have skipped the
allocation in the first place. So, I think it would make sense to release only
for the types we have actually allocated. What do you think?

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-17  9:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-07 16:16 [PATCH 0/2] " Petr Pavlu
2025-06-07 16:16 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Petr Pavlu
2025-06-08  7:25   ` Petr Pavlu
2025-06-09 22:12     ` Sami Tolvanen
2025-06-10 18:51   ` Daniel Gomez
2025-06-12 10:48     ` Petr Pavlu
2025-06-14 21:28       ` Daniel Gomez
2025-06-16 13:58         ` Petr Pavlu
2025-06-17  9:47           ` Daniel Gomez [this message]
2025-06-17 15:41             ` Petr Pavlu
2025-06-17 17:17               ` Daniel Gomez
2025-06-07 16:16 ` [PATCH 2/2] module: Avoid unnecessary return value initialization " Petr Pavlu
2025-06-09 22:13   ` Sami Tolvanen
2025-06-10 18:56   ` Daniel Gomez

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:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=732dedee-c7c5-4226-ad87-f4c2311b11b3@kernel.org \
    --to=da.gomez@kernel.org \
    --cc=da.gomez@samsung.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-modules@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
    --cc=petr.pavlu@suse.com \
    --cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®