linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] Check write to slab memory which freed already using mudflap

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:	Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:46:29 +0300
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Janboe Ye <yuan-bo.ye@...orola.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vegard.nossum@...il.com,
	graydon@...hat.com, fche@...hat.com, cl@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Check write to slab memory which freed already
 using mudflap

Hi David,

On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 02:41 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> The reason why I'd like to see slqb merged as a non-default alternative is 
> because it exposes the allocator to more benchmarking coverage than would 
> be possible in any other environment and attracts much more attention to 
> development for those who don't pull Pekka's tree directly.

Yes, we can do that. But I'm not going to ask Linus to pull something
that has known _boot-time_ bugs (that we haven't been able to figure out
in over three months!) because it's a pretty clear indication that we're
not on top of things yet.

So if you want to fast-track SLQB, feel free to help out Nick in
debugging that sucker ;).

			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/