|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC] x86/hpet: Correct -ENOMEM actions in hpet_fsb_cap_lookup()
>>> On 28.08.13 at 18:55, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> These changes are entirely from inspection, discovered while investigating
> another problem.
>
> * Don't leak the previously allocated cpumasks
> * Don't leave num_hpets_used > 0. It would fool hpet_broadcast_init() into
> believing that broadcast mode had been set up, despite having freed the
> underlying datastructure (and subsequenly result in a NULL pointer fault).
> * Unconditionally decallocate hpet_events. hpet_broadcast_init() will then
> try to allocate a single hpet_event_channel instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
> CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
>
> This patch is RFC as I didn't actually encounter the problem, nor can think of
> an easy way of actually testing the correctness of the codepath. Chances are
> that if -ENOMEM occurs here, Xen is not actually going to complete booting.
And you're turning a success case (just using fewer than the
available channels) into an error one - it was intentionally coded
this way, and only if there's a problem with that logic I'd consider
a patch valid.
Jan
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hpet.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hpet.c
> @@ -415,11 +415,12 @@ static void __init hpet_fsb_cap_lookup(void)
>
> if ( !zalloc_cpumask_var(&ch->cpumask) )
> {
> - if ( !num_hpets_used )
> - {
> - xfree(hpet_events);
> - hpet_events = NULL;
> - }
> + /* Out of mem. Clean up and bail. */
> + for ( i = 0; i < num_hpets_used; ++i )
> + free_cpumask_var(hpet_events[i].cpumask);
> + xfree(hpet_events);
> + hpet_events = NULL;
> + num_hpets_used = 0;
> break;
> }
>
> --
> 1.7.10.4
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |