Re: [PATCH V4 4/5] virtio: introduce a vDPA based transport

[Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>]

On 2020/2/20 下午11:19, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 02:11:40PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> +static int virtio_vdpa_probe(struct vdpa_device *vdpa)
>> +{
>> +	const struct vdpa_config_ops *ops = vdpa->config;
>> +	struct virtio_vdpa_device *vd_dev;
>> +	int ret = -EINVAL;
>> +
>> +	vd_dev = kzalloc(sizeof(*vd_dev), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!vd_dev)
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +	vd_dev->vdev.dev.parent = vdpa_get_dma_dev(vdpa);
>> +	vd_dev->vdev.dev.release = virtio_vdpa_release_dev;
>> +	vd_dev->vdev.config = &virtio_vdpa_config_ops;
>> +	vd_dev->vdpa = vdpa;
>> +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vd_dev->virtqueues);
>> +	spin_lock_init(&vd_dev->lock);
>> +
>> +	vd_dev->vdev.id.device = ops->get_device_id(vdpa);
>> +	if (vd_dev->vdev.id.device == 0)
>> +		goto err;
>> +
>> +	vd_dev->vdev.id.vendor = ops->get_vendor_id(vdpa);
>> +	ret = register_virtio_device(&vd_dev->vdev);
>> +	if (ret)
>> +		goto err;
> This error unwind is wrong. register_virtio_device() does
> device_initialize() as it's first action. After that point error
> unwind must be done with put_device() - particularly calling
> kfree(vd_dev) after doing dev_set_name() leaks memory.


Exactly.


>
> Looks like about half of the register_virtio_device() users did this
> right, the others not. Perhaps you should fix them too...
>
> Jason


Will do.

Thanks


>