single_open/seq_release leak diagnostics
PATCH 1/1 single_open/seq_release leak diagnostics
"[PATCH] Fix leaks on /proc/{*/sched,sched_debug,timer_list,timer_stats}" and "[PATCH] Fix leak on /proc/lockdep_stats" fixed 5 leaks which happen if one uses single_open() as .open function and seq_release() as .release function.
Let's add small amount of runtime checking.
Sample output is:
memory leak: 'timer_list' WARNING: at fs/seq_file.c:289 seq_release() [<c015e311>] seq_release+0x53/0x68 [<c0171bd8>] proc_reg_release+0x63/0x74 [<c0149877>] __fput+0x28/0xd3 [<c0147681>] filp_close+0x48/0x4f [<c014876a>] sys_close+0x74/0xbe [<c010248e>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0x85 =======================
---
fs/seq_file.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++----- include/linux/seq_file.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
fs/seq_file.c +20 -5
@@ -281,6 +281,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(seq_lseek);int seq_release (struct inode *inode,struct file *file) {struct seq_file *m = (struct seq_file *)file->private_data; + +if (m->seq_ops_allocated) { +struct dentry *dentry = file->f_dentry; +printk ("memory leak: '%.*s'\n" , + dentry->d_name.len, dentry->d_name.name); +WARN_ON (1 ); + }kfree (m->buf);kfree (m);return 0 ;
@@ -401,9 +408,12 @@ int single_open(struct file *file, int (*show)(struct seq_file *, void *), op->stop = single_stop; op->show = show; res =seq_open (file, op); -if (!res) - ((struct seq_file *)file->private_data)->private = data; -else +if (!res) { +struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data; + + seq->private = data; + seq->seq_ops_allocated =1 ; + }else kfree (op); }return res;
@@ -412,8 +422,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(single_open);int single_release (struct inode *inode,struct file *file) { -const struct seq_operations *op = ((struct seq_file *)file->private_data)->op; -int res =seq_release (inode, file); +struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data; +const struct seq_operations *op = seq->op; +int res; + +/* All roads lead to seq_release(), so... */ + seq->seq_ops_allocated =0 ; + res =seq_release (inode, file);kfree (op);return res; }
include/linux/seq_file.h +1 -0
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ struct seq_file {struct mutex lock;const struct seq_operations *op;void *private; + unsigned int seq_ops_allocated:1; };struct seq_operations {
Hi,
Quoted 52 lines · Alexey Dobriyan
[...]
fs/seq_file.c +20
-5@@ -281,6 +281,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(seq_lseek);int seq_release (struct inode *inode,struct file *file) {struct seq_file *m = (struct seq_file *)file->private_data; + +if (m->seq_ops_allocated) { +struct dentry *dentry = file->f_dentry; +printk ("memory leak: '%.*s'\n" , + dentry->d_name.len, dentry->d_name.name); +WARN_ON (1 ); + }kfree (m->buf);kfree (m);return 0 ;@@ -401,9 +408,12 @@ int single_open(struct file *file, int (*show)(struct seq_file *, void *), op->stop = single_stop; op->show = show; res =seq_open (file, op); -if (!res) - ((struct seq_file *)file->private_data)->private = data; -else +if (!res) { +struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data; + + seq->private = data; + seq->seq_ops_allocated =1 ; + }else kfree (op); }return res;@@ -412,8 +422,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(single_open);int single_release (struct inode *inode,struct file *file) { -const struct seq_operations *op = ((struct seq_file *)file->private_data)->op; -int res =seq_release (inode, file); +struct seq_file *seq = file->private_data; +const struct seq_operations *op = seq->op; +int res; + +/* All roads lead to seq_release(), so... */ + seq->seq_ops_allocated =0 ; + res =seq_release (inode, file);kfree (op);return res; }
include/linux/seq_file.h struct seq_file { · line 28
Quoted 7 lines
include/linux/seq_file.h +1
-0@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ struct seq_file {struct mutex lock;const struct seq_operations *op;void *private; + unsigned int seq_ops_allocated:1; };struct seq_operations {
Hmm, curiously, I think this patch just killed the utility of having single_release() around in the first place :-)
We might as well free the seq_file->op when we detect that we're leaking it in seq_release() itself. That makes single_release() wholly redundant to keep, and we can just convert all its users to seq_release() itself. With less of these around, lesser probability of someone coding a bug/leak in the first place!
Just my Rs. 0.02,
Satyam