[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 5/9] mem: fix potential resource leak

Bruce Richardson bruce.richardson at intel.com
Fri Apr 27 18:27:12 CEST 2018


On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:55:51PM +0100, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> On 27-Apr-18 4:21 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 10:56:43AM +0100, Anatoly Burakov wrote:
> > > Normally, tailq entry should have a valid fd by the time we attempt
> > > to map the segment. However, in case it doesn't, we're leaking fd,
> > > so fix it.
> > > 
> > > Coverity issue: 272570
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 2a04139f66b4 ("eal: add single file segments option")
> > > Cc: anatoly.burakov at intel.com
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov at intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >   lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memalloc.c | 2 ++
> > >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memalloc.c b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memalloc.c
> > > index fab5a98..b02e3a5 100644
> > > --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memalloc.c
> > > +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memalloc.c
> > > @@ -524,6 +524,8 @@ alloc_seg(struct rte_memseg *ms, void *addr, int socket_id,
> > >   			if (te != NULL && te->fd >= 0) {
> > >   				close(te->fd);
> > >   				te->fd = -1;
> > 
> > Is "fd" still not being leaked here, since we won't hit the else case and
> > then jump to the end of the function where it goes out of scope?
> 
> Perhaps i should clarify - te->fd and fd are the same fd.
> 
Can you clarify that to coverity somehow?


More information about the dev mailing list