Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: fix memory leak in kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev()

From: Vitaly Kuznetsov
Date: Fri Sep 04 2020 - 08:04:40 EST


Rustam Kovhaev <rkovhaev@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 06:34:11PM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 9/2/20 17:57, Rustam Kovhaev wrote:
>> > when kmalloc() fails in kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev(), before removing
>> > the bus, we should iterate over all other devices linked to it and call
>> > kvm_iodevice_destructor() for them
>> >
>> > Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+f196caa45793d6374707@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=f196caa45793d6374707
>> > Signed-off-by: Rustam Kovhaev <rkovhaev@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > Reviewed-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> I think it's worthwhile to add a Fixes tag for this, too.
>>
>> Please, see more comments below...
>>
>> > ---
>> > v2:
>> > - remove redundant whitespace
>> > - remove goto statement and use if/else
>> > ---
>> > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 21 ++++++++++++---------
>> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>> > index 67cd0b88a6b6..cf88233b819a 100644
>> > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>> > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
>> > @@ -4332,7 +4332,7 @@ int kvm_io_bus_register_dev(struct kvm *kvm, enum kvm_bus bus_idx, gpa_t addr,
>> > void kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev(struct kvm *kvm, enum kvm_bus bus_idx,
>> > struct kvm_io_device *dev)
>> > {
>> > - int i;
>> > + int i, j;
>> > struct kvm_io_bus *new_bus, *bus;
>> >
>> > bus = kvm_get_bus(kvm, bus_idx);
>> > @@ -4349,17 +4349,20 @@ void kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev(struct kvm *kvm, enum kvm_bus bus_idx,
>> >
>> > new_bus = kmalloc(struct_size(bus, range, bus->dev_count - 1),
>> > GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT);
>> > - if (!new_bus) {
>> > + if (new_bus) {
>> > + memcpy(new_bus, bus, sizeof(*bus) + i * sizeof(struct kvm_io_range));
>>
>> ^^^
>> It seems that you can use struct_size() here (see the allocation code above)...
>>
>> > + new_bus->dev_count--;
>> > + memcpy(new_bus->range + i, bus->range + i + 1,
>> > + (new_bus->dev_count - i) * sizeof(struct kvm_io_range));
>>
>> ^^^
>> ...and, if possible, you can also use flex_array_size() here.
>>
>> Thanks
>> --
>> Gustavo
>>
>> > + } else {
>> > pr_err("kvm: failed to shrink bus, removing it completely\n");
>> > - goto broken;
>> > + for (j = 0; j < bus->dev_count; j++) {
>> > + if (j == i)
>> > + continue;
>> > + kvm_iodevice_destructor(bus->range[j].dev);
>> > + }
>> > }
>> >
>> > - memcpy(new_bus, bus, sizeof(*bus) + i * sizeof(struct kvm_io_range));
>> > - new_bus->dev_count--;
>> > - memcpy(new_bus->range + i, bus->range + i + 1,
>> > - (new_bus->dev_count - i) * sizeof(struct kvm_io_range));
>> > -
>> > -broken:
>> > rcu_assign_pointer(kvm->buses[bus_idx], new_bus);
>> > synchronize_srcu_expedited(&kvm->srcu);
>> > kfree(bus);
>> >
>
> hi Gustavo, thank you for the review, i'll send the new patch.
> Vitaly, i think i will need to drop your "Reviewed-by", because there is
> going to be a bit more changes
>

Personally, I'd prefer to make struct_size()/flex_array_size() a
separate preparatory patch so the real fix is small but I don't have a
strong opinion. I'll take look at v3 so feel free to drop R-b if you
decide to make a combined patch and feel free to keep it if you make the
preparatory changes separate :-)

--
Vitaly