RE: [PATCH] optee: Suppress false positive kmemleak report in optee_handle_rpc()

["Wang, Xiaolei" <Xiaolei.Wang@windriver.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@linaro.org> 
Sent: Thursday, December 9, 2021 7:41 PM
To: Wang, Xiaolei <Xiaolei.Wang@windriver.com>
Cc: jens.wiklander@linaro.org; op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] optee: Suppress false positive kmemleak report in optee_handle_rpc()

[Please note: This e-mail is from an EXTERNAL e-mail address]

On Mon, 6 Dec 2021 at 17:35, Xiaolei Wang <xiaolei.wang@windriver.com> wrote:
>
> We observed the following kmemleak report:
> unreferenced object 0xffff000007904500 (size 128):
>   comm "swapper/0", pid 1, jiffies 4294892671 (age 44.036s)
>   hex dump (first 32 bytes):
>     00 47 90 07 00 00 ff ff 60 00 c0 ff 00 00 00 00  .G......`.......
>     60 00 80 13 00 80 ff ff a0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  `...............
>   backtrace:
>     [<000000004c12b1c7>] kmem_cache_alloc+0x1ac/0x2f4
>     [<000000005d23eb4f>] tee_shm_alloc+0x78/0x230
>     [<00000000794dd22c>] optee_handle_rpc+0x60/0x6f0
>     [<00000000d9f7c52d>] optee_do_call_with_arg+0x17c/0x1dc
>     [<00000000c35884da>] optee_open_session+0x128/0x1ec
>     [<000000001748f2ff>] tee_client_open_session+0x28/0x40
>     [<00000000aecb5389>] optee_enumerate_devices+0x84/0x2a0
>     [<000000003df18bf1>] optee_probe+0x674/0x6cc
>     [<000000003a4a534a>] platform_drv_probe+0x54/0xb0
>     [<000000000c51ce7d>] really_probe+0xe4/0x4d0
>     [<000000002f04c865>] driver_probe_device+0x58/0xc0
>     [<00000000b485397d>] device_driver_attach+0xc0/0xd0
>     [<00000000c835f0df>] __driver_attach+0x84/0x124
>     [<000000008e5a429c>] bus_for_each_dev+0x70/0xc0
>     [<000000001735e8a8>] driver_attach+0x24/0x30
>     [<000000006d94b04f>] bus_add_driver+0x104/0x1ec
>
> This is not a memory leak because we pass the share memory pointer to 
> secure world and would get it from secure world before releasing it.

> How about if it's actually a memory leak caused by the secure world?
> An example being secure world just allocates kernel memory via OPTEE_SMC_RPC_FUNC_ALLOC and doesn't free it via OPTEE_SMC_RPC_FUNC_FREE.

> IMO, we need to cross-check optee-os if it's responsible for leaking kernel memory.

Hi sumit,

You mean we need to check whether there is a real memleak,
If being secure world just allocate kernel memory via OPTEE_SMC_PRC_FUNC_ALLOC and until the end, there is no free
It via OPTEE_SMC_PRC_FUNC_FREE, then we should judge it as a memory leak, wo need to judge whether it is caused by secure os?

Thanks
Xiaolei


> -Sumit

>
> Signed-off-by: Xiaolei Wang <xiaolei.wang@windriver.com>
> ---
>  drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c b/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c 
> index 6196d7c3888f..cf2e3293567d 100644
> --- a/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c
> +++ b/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
>  #include "optee_private.h"
>  #include "optee_smc.h"
>  #include "optee_rpc_cmd.h"
> +#include <linux/kmemleak.h>
>  #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
>  #include "optee_trace.h"
>
> @@ -783,6 +784,7 @@ static void optee_handle_rpc(struct tee_context *ctx,
>                         param->a4 = 0;
>                         param->a5 = 0;
>                 }
> +               kmemleak_not_leak(shm);
>                 break;
>         case OPTEE_SMC_RPC_FUNC_FREE:
>                 shm = reg_pair_to_ptr(param->a1, param->a2);
> --
> 2.25.1
>