Re: [3.1-rc6] kmalloc(64) leak from IDE

[Simon Kirby]

On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:27:05AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 07:07:55PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > (forgot to Cc linux-ide earlier, sorry)
> > 
> > On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 01:05:50AM -0700, Simon Kirby wrote:
> > > Ok, good. It's still running without any problem, and no new leaks
> > > reported.
> > 
> > Ok.
> > 
> > [..]
> > 
> > > > backporting it to -stable is a good point. I'll add the proper tagging
> > > > to the patch.
> > > 
> > > Do you know in which version the issue started, then?
> > > 
> > > If not, all I have to start with is that it was fine on 2.6.36, and I can
> > > bisect it, if that would help.
> > 
> > This is exactly the question: AFAICT, it could be that changes in the
> > block layer at some point have caused the ide bust and since almost no
> > one tests ide...
> > 
> > The patch adding the dynamic ide_cmd struct allocation is
> > 395d8ef5bebe547a80737692f9789d2e36da16f2 from 2008 and I don't think it
> > caused the issue then but I could also be remembering it wrong.
> > 
> > So I wouldn't bisect it but test stable trees after 2.6.36 to see
> > whether they have the issue, and if so, only then the patch should be
> > backported.
> > 
> > And this is not that easy now with k.org down but looking at
> > 
> > http://web.archive.org/web/20110725015737/http://kernel.org/
> > 
> > the only stable trees which need to be tested are 2.6.39 and 3.0.
> > 
> > How does that sound?
> 
> Btw, here's the patch, if you would like to test 2.6.39 once without it
> to see whether kmemleak screams and once with it, I'll add the stable
> tagging.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --
> >From 96414ddbfecaaa3d265794c0792d816cf3c1e33d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 13:38:04 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] ide-disk: Fix request requeuing
> 
> Simon Kirby reported that on his RAID setup with idedisk underneath
> the box OOMs after a couple of days of runtime. Running with
> CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK pointed to idedisk_prep_fn() which unconditionally
> allocates an ide_cmd struct. However, ide_requeue_and_plug() can be
> called more than once per request, either from the request issue or the
> IRQ handler path and do blk_peek_request() ends up in idedisk_prep_fn()
> repeatedly, allocating a struct ide_cmd everytime and "forgetting" the
> previous pointer.
> 
> Make sure the code reuses the old allocated chunk.
> 
> Reported-and-tested-by: Simon Kirby <sim@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=131667641517919
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20110922072643.GA27232@xxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/ide/ide-disk.c |    7 ++++++-
>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c b/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
> index 274798068a54..16f69be820c7 100644
> --- a/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
> +++ b/drivers/ide/ide-disk.c
> @@ -435,7 +435,12 @@ static int idedisk_prep_fn(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq)
>  	if (!(rq->cmd_flags & REQ_FLUSH))
>  		return BLKPREP_OK;
>  
> -	cmd = kzalloc(sizeof(*cmd), GFP_ATOMIC);
> +	if (rq->special) {
> +		cmd = rq->special;
> +		memset(cmd, 0, sizeof(*cmd));
> +	} else {
> +		cmd = kzalloc(sizeof(*cmd), GFP_ATOMIC);
> +	}
>  
>  	/* FIXME: map struct ide_taskfile on rq->cmd[] */
>  	BUG_ON(cmd == NULL);
> -- 
> 1.7.5.3.401.gfb674

Tested against on 2.6.39 with and without this patch, and it definitely
leaks without it and does not leak with it. 3.0 and 3.1-rc8 also seems
good with the patch.

I tested on another IDE box (with an old Quantum Fireball 6.4GB!) and
even with software RAID, I could not see the leak, so I had to use the
original box, of course. The only difference I could see is the test
box has piix and the production box has via82cxxx, but anyway...

Thanks!

Simon-
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/