[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] cryptodev: fix NULL pointer dereference

[Sergio Gonzalez Monroy]

On 31/07/2017 20:33, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 31/07/2017 11:18, Pablo de Lara:
>> When register a crypto driver, a cryptodev driver
>> structure was being allocated, using malloc.
>> Since this call may fail, it is safer to allocate
>> this memory statically in each PMD, so driver registration
>> will never fail.
>>
>> Coverity issue: 158645
>>
>> Fixes: 7a364faef185 ("cryptodev: remove crypto device type enumeration")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>>
>> - Allocate statically the cryptodev driver structure,
>>    instead of using malloc, that can potentially fail.
>>
>>   drivers/crypto/aesni_gcm/aesni_gcm_pmd.c    |  5 ++++-
>>   drivers/crypto/aesni_mb/rte_aesni_mb_pmd.c  |  6 +++++-
>>   drivers/crypto/armv8/rte_armv8_pmd.c        |  9 ++++++---
>>   drivers/crypto/dpaa2_sec/dpaa2_sec_dpseci.c |  5 ++++-
>>   drivers/crypto/kasumi/rte_kasumi_pmd.c      |  5 ++++-
>>   drivers/crypto/null/null_crypto_pmd.c       |  5 ++++-
>>   drivers/crypto/openssl/rte_openssl_pmd.c    |  5 ++++-
>>   drivers/crypto/qat/rte_qat_cryptodev.c      |  7 +++++--
>>   drivers/crypto/scheduler/scheduler_pmd.c    |  5 ++++-
>>   drivers/crypto/snow3g/rte_snow3g_pmd.c      |  5 ++++-
>>   drivers/crypto/zuc/rte_zuc_pmd.c            |  5 ++++-
>>   lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c        | 18 +++++------------
>>   lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.h        | 20 -------------------
>>   lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev_pmd.h    | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   14 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
> This is a big change for a small/unlikely issue.
> The main benefit of this patch is an allocation cleanup.
> I think it is better to wait 17.11 cycle to integrate it.

We initially thought of exit given that it is a constructor and if you 
fail to allocate memory at this stage, things are likely not going to 
work out anyway.

The patch is an API change, do we really want to break again (we are 
breaking in this release) next release?

Thanks,
Sergio