linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] debug_check_no_locks_freed: fix in

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 24 Nov 2007 13:22:37 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc:	Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>, Milan Broz <mbroz@...hat.com>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	Torsten Kaiser <just.for.lkml@...glemail.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] debug_check_no_locks_freed: fix in_range() checks


* Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru> wrote:

> > But debug_check_no_locks_freed() seems does:
> > const void *mem_to = mem_from + mem_len
> > -> mem_to is the last byte of the freed range, that fits in_range
> > lock_from = (void *)hlock->instance;
> > -> first byte of the lock
> > lock_to = (void *)(hlock->instance + 1);
> > -> first byte of the next lock, not last byte of the lock that is being checked!
> >
> > The test is:
> > if (!in_range(mem_from, lock_from, mem_to) &&
> >                                         !in_range(mem_from, lock_to, mem_to))
> >                         continue;
> > So it tests, if the first byte of the lock is in the range that is freed ->OK
> > And if the first byte of the *next* lock is in the range that is freed
> > -> Not OK.

thanks, applied.

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