Hi,
Dne petek, 09. marec 2018 ob 00:49:18 CET je Kuninori Morimoto napisal(a):
Hi Mark,Jernej
Ahh.. indeed. Good catch ! How about to add such flag ? This is just idea. No tested, No compiled, but can help you ?
I think this makes sense as a patch. We might want to disallow allocating components as part of a bigger struct so everything is more consistent but that's a bigger thing.
(snip)
I tested this patch and there is no crash anymore. If you will send it as a fix, you can add:
Reported-by: Jernej Skrabec jernej.skrabec@siol.net Tested-by: Jernej Skrabec jernej.skrabec@siol.net
previous my patch used new flag (= .alloced_component), but I think it is not good idea. And I noticed that snd_soc_add_component() is also calling kfree(component) (= has same bug).
So how about below one ? I want to post it instead of previous.
# I will go to ELC next week, thus posting patch will be # 2weeks later
diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-core.c b/sound/soc/soc-core.c index c0edac8..4a8de23 100644 --- a/sound/soc/soc-core.c +++ b/sound/soc/soc-core.c @@ -3476,7 +3476,6 @@ int snd_soc_add_component(struct device *dev, err_cleanup: snd_soc_component_cleanup(component); err_free:
- kfree(component); return ret;
} EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(snd_soc_add_component); @@ -3488,7 +3487,7 @@ int snd_soc_register_component(struct device *dev, { struct snd_soc_component *component;
- component = kzalloc(sizeof(*component), GFP_KERNEL);
- component = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*component), GFP_KERNEL); if (!component) return -ENOMEM;
@@ -3523,7 +3522,6 @@ static int __snd_soc_unregister_component(struct device *dev)
if (found) { snd_soc_component_cleanup(component);
kfree(component);}
return found;
That patch also prevents the crash, so you can add my tested-by and reported- by tags for this patch too.
Best regards, Jernej