On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 01:01:27PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Rustam Kovhaev <rkovh...@gmail.com> > Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2020 06:13:36 -0700 > > > when register_netdevice(dev) fails we should check whether struct > > veth_rq has been allocated via ndo_init callback and free it, because, > > depending on the code path, register_netdevice() might not call > > priv_destructor() callback > > > > Reported-and-tested-by: > > syzbot+59ef240dd8f0ed759...@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > > Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=59ef240dd8f0ed7598a8 > > Signed-off-by: Rustam Kovhaev <rkovh...@gmail.com> > > I think I agree with Toshiaki here. There is no reason why the > rollback_registered() path of register_netdevice() should behave > differently from the normal control flow. > > Any code path that invokes ->ndo_uninit() should probably also > invoke the priv destructor. hi David, thank you for the review!
> > The question is why does the err_uninit: label of register_netdevice > behave differently from rollback_registered()? If there is a reason, > it should be documented in a comment or similar. If it is wrong, > it should be corrected. good question, that i do not know, i'll review it
