Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) 
to consider:
- [Medium] tracing/filters: process_system_preds() returns 0 on ENOMEM after 
match
--

commit a15564919ee696f8c1b9df5aeee0a37935f51db7
Author: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <[email protected]>

tracing/filters: Fix false success return in process_system_preds()

This commit replaces the boolean fail flag in process_system_preds() with
ret so that process_system_preds() returns -EINVAL when no event in the
subsystem matches the filter. It also consolidates the fail and fail_mem
error cleanup paths.

> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events_filter.c 
> b/kernel/trace/trace_events_filter.c
> index 28977d10e60b6..b35ecb01697b8 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events_filter.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events_filter.c
> @@ -2337,7 +2337,7 @@ static int process_system_preds(struct 
> trace_subsystem_dir *dir,
>       struct filter_list *filter_item;
>       struct event_filter *filter = NULL;
>       struct filter_head *filter_list;
> -     bool fail = true;
> +     int ret = -ENOMEM;
>       int err;
>  
>       filter_list = kmalloc_obj(*filter_list);
> @@ -2364,8 +2364,10 @@ static int process_system_preds(struct 
> trace_subsystem_dir *dir,
>                       filter_disable(file);
>                       parse_error(pe, FILT_ERR_BAD_SUBSYS_FILTER, 0);
>                       append_filter_err(tr, pe, filter);
> -             } else
> +             } else {
>                       event_set_filtered_flag(file);
> +                     ret = 0;
> +             }
>  
>  
>               filter_item = kzalloc_obj(*filter_item);
> @@ -2380,11 +2382,9 @@ static int process_system_preds(struct 
> trace_subsystem_dir *dir,
>               filter_item->filter = event_filter(file);
>               event_set_filter(file, filter);
>               filter = NULL;
> -
> -             fail = false;
>       }
>  
> -     if (fail)
> +     if (ret)
>               goto fail;
>  
>       /*
> @@ -2396,19 +2396,18 @@ static int process_system_preds(struct 
> trace_subsystem_dir *dir,
>       return 0;
>   fail:
>       /* No call succeeded */
> -     free_filter_list(filter_list);
>       parse_error(pe, FILT_ERR_BAD_SUBSYS_FILTER, 0);
> -     return -EINVAL;
> +     ret = -EINVAL;
>   fail_mem:
>       __free_filter(filter);
>  
> -     /* If any call succeeded, we still need to sync */
> -     if (!fail)
> +     /* If any filter was replaced, we still need to sync */
> +     if (!list_empty(&filter_list->list))
>               delay_free_filter(filter_list);
>       else
>               free_filter_list(filter_list);
>  
> -     return -ENOMEM;
> +     return ret;

[Severity: Medium]
Can process_system_preds() return 0 instead of -ENOMEM when an allocation
fails after at least one event matches the filter?

In kernel/trace/trace_events_filter.c:process_system_preds(), ret is
initialized to -ENOMEM and cleared to 0 as soon as process_preds() succeeds
for an event:

        err = process_preds(file->event_call, filter_string, filter, pe);
        if (err) {
                ...
        } else {
                event_set_filtered_flag(file);
                ret = 0;
        }

        filter_item = kzalloc_obj(*filter_item);
        if (!filter_item)
                goto fail_mem;

If kzalloc_obj(*filter_item) fails on that same iteration, or if
kzalloc_obj(*filter), kstrdup(), or kzalloc_obj(*filter_item) fails on a
subsequent event in the loop, jumping to fail_mem returns ret (which is now
0) instead of -ENOMEM.

That causes create_system_filter() and apply_subsystem_event_filter() to
treat the aborted update as a success, leaving the remaining events in the
subsystem without the new filter applied. Also, if kzalloc_obj(*filter_item)
fails right after event_set_filtered_flag(file) runs, EVENT_FILE_FL_FILTERED
is set and trace_buffered_event_enable() is called, while fail_mem frees the
new filter without installing it via event_set_filter(file, filter).

-- 
Sashiko AI review ยท 
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/179323784538.740114.15323117974242744566.stgit@devnote2?part=2

Reply via email to