Linux Virtualization - Mar 2020 - [PATCH] virtio_ring: Fix mem leak with vring_new_virtqueue()

On 2/25/20 9:13 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2020/2/26 ??12:51, Suman Anna wrote:
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> On 2/24/20 11:39 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
>>> On 2020/2/25 ??5:26, Suman Anna wrote:
>>>> The functions vring_new_virtqueue() and __vring_new_virtqueue()
are
>>>> used
>>>> with split rings, and any allocations within these functions
are
>>>> managed
>>>> outside of the .we_own_ring flag. The commit cbeedb72b97a
>>>> ("virtio_ring:
>>>> allocate desc state for split ring separately") allocates
the desc
>>>> state
>>>> within the __vring_new_virtqueue() but frees it only when the
>>>> .we_own_ring
>>>> flag is set. This leads to a memory leak when freeing such
allocated
>>>> virtqueues with the vring_del_virtqueue() function.
>>>>
>>>> Fix this by moving the desc_state free code outside the flag
and only
>>>> for split rings. Issue was discovered during testing with
remoteproc
>>>> and virtio_rpmsg.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: cbeedb72b97a ("virtio_ring: allocate desc state for
split ring
>>>> separately")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna<s-anna at ti.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> ?? drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 4 ++--
>>>> ?? 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>>>> b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>>>> index 867c7ebd3f10..58b96baa8d48 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
>>>> @@ -2203,10 +2203,10 @@ void vring_del_virtqueue(struct
virtqueue *_vq)
>>>> ??????????????????????? vq->split.queue_size_in_bytes,
>>>> ??????????????????????? vq->split.vring.desc,
>>>> ??????????????????????? vq->split.queue_dma_addr);
>>>> -
>>>> -??????????? kfree(vq->split.desc_state);
>>>> ?????????? }
>>>> ?????? }
>>>> +??? if (!vq->packed_ring)
>>>> +??????? kfree(vq->split.desc_state);
>>> Nitpick, it looks to me it would be more clear if we just free
>>> desc_state unconditionally here (and remove the kfree for packed
above).
>> OK, are you sure you want that to be folded into this patch? It looks
to
>> me a separate cleanup/consolidation patch, and packed desc_state does
>> not suffer this memleak, and need not be backported into stable
kernels.
>>
>> regards
>> Suman
> 
> 
> Though it's just a small tweak, I'm fine for leaving it for future.
> 
> So
> 
> Acked-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com>
> 
Mike,
Ping on this. I don't see the patch in -next yet. Can we get this into
the current -rc please?

regards
Suman

On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 06:27:53PM -0600, Suman Anna
wrote:
> On 2/25/20 9:13 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> > 
> > On 2020/2/26 ??12:51, Suman Anna wrote:
> >> Hi Jason,
> >>
> >> On 2/24/20 11:39 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>> On 2020/2/25 ??5:26, Suman Anna wrote:
> >>>> The functions vring_new_virtqueue() and
__vring_new_virtqueue() are
> >>>> used
> >>>> with split rings, and any allocations within these
functions are
> >>>> managed
> >>>> outside of the .we_own_ring flag. The commit cbeedb72b97a
> >>>> ("virtio_ring:
> >>>> allocate desc state for split ring separately")
allocates the desc
> >>>> state
> >>>> within the __vring_new_virtqueue() but frees it only when
the
> >>>> .we_own_ring
> >>>> flag is set. This leads to a memory leak when freeing such
allocated
> >>>> virtqueues with the vring_del_virtqueue() function.
> >>>>
> >>>> Fix this by moving the desc_state free code outside the
flag and only
> >>>> for split rings. Issue was discovered during testing with
remoteproc
> >>>> and virtio_rpmsg.
> >>>>
> >>>> Fixes: cbeedb72b97a ("virtio_ring: allocate desc
state for split ring
> >>>> separately")
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna<s-anna at ti.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> ?? drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 4 ++--
> >>>> ?? 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> >>>> b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> >>>> index 867c7ebd3f10..58b96baa8d48 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> >>>> @@ -2203,10 +2203,10 @@ void vring_del_virtqueue(struct
virtqueue *_vq)
> >>>> ??????????????????????? vq->split.queue_size_in_bytes,
> >>>> ??????????????????????? vq->split.vring.desc,
> >>>> ??????????????????????? vq->split.queue_dma_addr);
> >>>> -
> >>>> -??????????? kfree(vq->split.desc_state);
> >>>> ?????????? }
> >>>> ?????? }
> >>>> +??? if (!vq->packed_ring)
> >>>> +??????? kfree(vq->split.desc_state);
> >>> Nitpick, it looks to me it would be more clear if we just free
> >>> desc_state unconditionally here (and remove the kfree for
packed above).
> >> OK, are you sure you want that to be folded into this patch? It
looks to
> >> me a separate cleanup/consolidation patch, and packed desc_state
does
> >> not suffer this memleak, and need not be backported into stable
kernels.
> >>
> >> regards
> >> Suman
> > 
> > 
> > Though it's just a small tweak, I'm fine for leaving it for
future.
> > 
> > So
> > 
> > Acked-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com>
> > 
> 
> Mike,
> Ping on this. I don't see the patch in -next yet. Can we get this into
> the current -rc please?
> 
> regards
> Suman
Yes will queue it shortly, thanks!