public inbox for cygwin-developers@cygwin.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin-developers@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Potential handle leaks in dup_worker
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 16:02:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210209150249.GT4251@calimero.vinschen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4b56fffd-5401-bd8a-0444-4b8b7a8da4f5@cornell.edu>

On Feb  9 09:19, Ken Brown via Cygwin-developers wrote:
> On 2/9/2021 4:47 AM, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin-developers wrote:
> > On Feb  8 12:39, Ken Brown via Cygwin-developers wrote:
> > > I've had occasion to work through dtable::dup_worker, and I'm seeing the
> > > potential for leaks of path_conv handles.  I haven't seen any evidence that
> > > the leaks actually occur, but the code should probably be cleaned up if I'm
> > > right.
> > > 
> > > dup_worker calls clone to create newfh from oldfh.  clone calls copyto,
> > > which calls operator=, which calls path_conv::operator=, which duplicates
> > > the path_conv handle from oldfh to newfh.  Then copyto calls reset, which
> > > calls path_conv::operator<<, which again duplicates the path_conv handle
> > > from oldfh to newfh without first closing the previous one.  That's the
> > > first leak.
> > > 
> > > Further on, dup_worker calls newfh->pc.reset_conv_handle (), which sets the
> > > path_conv handle of newfh to NULL without closing the existing handle.  So
> > > that's a second leak.  This one is easily fixed by calling close_conv_handle
> > > instead of reset_conv_handle.
> > 
> > Nice detective work, you're right.  For fun, this is easily testable.
> > Apply this patch to Cygwin:
> > [...]
> > > As a practical matter, I think the path_conv handle of oldfh is always NULL
> > > when dup_worker is called, so there's no actual leak.
> > 
> > Right, because conv_handle should only be non-NULL in calls to stat(2)
> > and friends.
> > 
> > Nevertheless, it's a bad idea to keep this code.  So the question is
> > this:  Do we actually *need* to duplicate the conv_handle at all?
> > It doesn't look like this is ever needed.  Perhaps the code should
> > just never duplicate conv_handle and just always reset it to NULL
> > instead?
> 
> I've come across one place where I think it's needed.  Suppose build_fh_name
> is called with PC_KEEP_HANDLE.  It calls build_fh_pc, which calls set_name,
> which calls path_conv::operator<<.  I think we need to duplicate conv_handle
> here.

Indeed, you're right.  I just found that the fhandler_base::reset method
is only called from copyto.  Given that fhandler::operator= already
calls path_conv::operator=, and that duplicates the conv handle, why
call path_conv::operator<< from fhandler_base::reset at all?  It looks
like this is only duplicating what already has been done.


Corinna

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-09 15:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-02-08 17:39 Ken Brown
2021-02-09  9:47 ` Corinna Vinschen
2021-02-09 14:19   ` Ken Brown
2021-02-09 15:02     ` Corinna Vinschen [this message]
2021-02-09 15:04       ` Corinna Vinschen
2021-02-09 15:31       ` Ken Brown
2021-02-09 16:12         ` Corinna Vinschen
2021-02-09 17:13           ` Ken Brown
2021-02-09 19:12             ` Ken Brown
2021-02-09 20:52               ` Corinna Vinschen
2021-02-09 22:31                 ` Ken Brown
2021-02-10  9:52                   ` Corinna Vinschen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210209150249.GT4251@calimero.vinschen.de \
    --to=corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com \
    --cc=cygwin-developers@cygwin.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).