On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 11:48 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcg...@kernel.org> wrote: >> While looking for early possible module loading failures I was >> able to reproduce a memory leak possible with kmemleak. There >> are a few rare ways to trigger a failure: >> >> o we've run into a failure while processing kernel parameters >> (parse_args() returns an error) >> o mod_sysfs_setup() fails >> o we're a live patch module and copy_module_elf() fails >> >> Chances of running into this issue is really low. >> >> kmemleak splat: >> >> unreferenced object 0xffff9f2c4ada1b00 (size 32): >> comm "kworker/u16:4", pid 82, jiffies 4294897636 (age 681.816s) >> hex dump (first 32 bytes): >> 6d 65 6d 73 74 69 63 6b 30 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 memstick0....... >> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ >> backtrace: >> [<ffffffff8c6cfeba>] kmemleak_alloc+0x4a/0xa0 >> [<ffffffff8c200046>] __kmalloc_track_caller+0x126/0x230 >> [<ffffffff8c1bc581>] kstrdup+0x31/0x60 >> [<ffffffff8c1bc5d4>] kstrdup_const+0x24/0x30 >> [<ffffffff8c3c23aa>] kvasprintf_const+0x7a/0x90 >> [<ffffffff8c3b5481>] kobject_set_name_vargs+0x21/0x90 >> [<ffffffff8c4fbdd7>] dev_set_name+0x47/0x50 >> [<ffffffffc07819e5>] memstick_check+0x95/0x33c [memstick] >> [<ffffffff8c09c893>] process_one_work+0x1f3/0x4b0 >> [<ffffffff8c09cb98>] worker_thread+0x48/0x4e0 >> [<ffffffff8c0a2b79>] kthread+0xc9/0xe0 >> [<ffffffff8c6dab5f>] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x40 >> [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff >> >> Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcg...@kernel.org> > > Acked-by: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> > > Is this worth sending through -stable too?
Yes, for some reason git-send e-mail complained to me about sta...@kernel.org not being a valid local address, so I had to remove it, but indeed. I'll try to fix this e-mail issue later and add your tag. Luis
