linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/15] kmemleak: Add the slub memory allocation/freeing hooks

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Thu, 11 Dec 2008 23:30:21 +0200
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/15] kmemleak: Add the slub memory allocation/freeing
 hooks

Catalin Marinas wrote:
> This patch adds the callbacks to memleak_(alloc|free) functions from the
> slub allocator.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>

Hmm, I'm not sure I understand why struct kmem_cache_cpu ->freelist is 
never scanned. For SMP, I suppose kmemleak doesn't scan the per-CPU 
areas? But for UP, struct kmem_cache is allocated with kmalloc() and 
that contains struct kmem_cache_cpu as well.

And I suppose we never scan struct pages either. Otherwise ->freelist 
there would be a problem as well.

		Pekka
--
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/