linux-kernel - [RFC]fs/ramfs/inode.c

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 30 Sep 2011 23:02:49 +0800
From:	harryxiyou <harryxiyou@...il.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: [RFC]fs/ramfs/inode.c

Hi all,
When i read ramfs's inode file fs/ramfs/inode.c. I just see the following codes
and get some confusions.

[......]
static void ramfs_kill_sb(struct super_block *sb)
{
           kfree(sb->s_fs_info);
           kill_litter_super(sb);
}
[.....]

If we can really free the sb->s_fs_info successfully everytime? Ok, you may say
kfree returns no value. But how we can guarantee it can be freed
right. And The same
problem with the function kill_litter_super(sb). We  also have some
other functions, which
i have the same confusions. I have searched the relevant codes about
kfree() with the tool
ctags and cscope, but i get so many relevant codes. I can not
distinguish which is the right
one. I think if we can not let the os stop, we just printk the
relevant error logs and make os
run as usual.

Thanks
Harry Wei
--
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/