Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-110884-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
From: "huangguanrui.hgr" <huangguanrui.hgr@alibaba-inc.com>
To: yuzenghui@huawei.com
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	maz@kernel.org,
	shannon.zhao@linux.alibaba.com,
	tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Fix double free on error
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 10:38:10 +0800
Message-Id: <20240322023810.62914-1-huangguanrui.hgr@alibaba-inc.com>
In-Reply-To: <aac642a4-85a1-6df4-1192-638ce0d5086e@huawei.com>
References: <aac642a4-85a1-6df4-1192-638ce0d5086e@huawei.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

We notice that:
In its_vpe_irq_domain_alloc, its_vm is from args, But in its_vpe_irq_domain_free,
its_vm is from domain->host_data.

Will these two values be different? For example, when other bugs occur?
If these two values is different, I think we can't handle these 2 cases together.

	if (err)
		its_vpe_irq_domain_free(domain, virq, i);
Because these will lead a memleak.

So I think that check the bitmap is a safe way to fix this. If bitmap is empty, that means 
its_vpe_irq_domain_free handles same its_vm which comes from its_vpe_irq_domain_alloc.

Thanks,
Guanrui