RDMA/iw_cxgb4: Avoid touch after free error in ARP failure handlers
Hello Raju Rangoju,
The patch 1dad0ebeea1c: "RDMA/iw_cxgb4: Avoid touch after free error in ARP failure handlers" from May 15, 2017, leads to the following static checker warning:
drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/cm.c:4310 process_work() warn: 'skb' was already freed.
drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/cm.c
4289 static void process_work(struct work_struct *work) 4290 {
4291 struct sk_buff *skb = NULL;
4292 struct c4iw_dev *dev;
4293 struct cpl_act_establish *rpl;
4294 unsigned int opcode;
4295 int ret;
4296
4297 process_timedout_eps();
4298 while ((skb = skb_dequeue(&rxq))) {
4299 rpl = cplhdr(skb);
4300 dev = *((struct c4iw_dev **) (skb->cb + sizeof(void *)));
4301 opcode = rpl->ot.opcode; 4302
4303 if (opcode >= ARRAY_SIZE(work_handlers) ||
4304 !work_handlers[opcode]) {
4305 pr_err("No handler for opcode 0x%x.\n", opcode);
4306 kfree_skb(skb);
4307 } else {
4308 ret = work_handlers[opcode](dev, skb);
4309 if (!ret)
4310 kfree_skb(skb);
I'm not sure why this warning didn't show up before... :(
We added some kfree_skb() calls to _put_ep_safe() and _put_pass_ep_safe(). The thing about kfree_skb() is that it's refcounted so it might not free anything so this could be a false positive. I've looked at the code and it looks like it could be a bug?
4311 } 4312 process_timedout_eps(); 4313 } 4314 }
regards,
dan carpenter
Quoted 33 lines · Dan Carpenter
Hello Raju Rangoju,
The patch
1dad0ebeea1c: "RDMA/iw_cxgb4: Avoid touch after free error in ARP failure handlers" from May 15, 2017, leads to the following static checker warning:drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/cm.c:4310 process_work() warn: 'skb' was already freed.
drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/cm.c
4289 static voidprocess_work(struct work_struct *work)4290 {4291 struct sk_buff *skb = NULL; 4292 struct c4iw_dev *dev; 4293 struct cpl_act_establish *rpl; 4294 unsigned int opcode; 4295 int ret; 4296 4297 process_timedout_eps(); 4298 while ((skb = skb_dequeue(&rxq))) { 4299 rpl = cplhdr(skb); 4300 dev = *((struct c4iw_dev **) (skb->cb + sizeof(void *))); 4301 opcode = rpl->ot.opcode;4302
4303 if (opcode >=ARRAY_SIZE(work_handlers)||
4304 !work_handlers[opcode]) {
4305pr_err("No handler for opcode 0x%x.\n", opcode);
4306kfree_skb(skb);
4307 } else {
4308 ret = work_handlers[opcode](dev, skb);
4309 if (!ret)
4310kfree_skb(skb);
Quoted 6 lines
I'm not sure why this warning didn't show up before... :(
We added some
kfree_skb()calls to_put_ep_safe()and_put_pass_ep_safe(). The thing aboutkfree_skb()is that it's refcounted so it might not free anything so this could be a false positive. I've looked at the code and it looks like it could be a bug?
Hi Dan,
Thanks for the check.
I have observed this and looks like the kfree_skb() in _put_ep_safe() and _put_pass_ep_safe() are not needed as the skb is anyway freed by process_work() I have checked the refcounts before kfree_skb() for _put_ep_safe() and _put_pass_ep_safe() and they are '1' by simulating the error, so I believe kfree_skb() in process_work() should just be enough.
I have tested the patch to remove the kfree_skb() from _put_ep_safe() and
_put_pass_ep_safe(). It runs fine.
Thanks,
Bharat.
Quoted 8 lines
4311 } 4312 process_timedout_eps(); 4313 } 4314 }regards,
dan carpenter