linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/11] cgroup: use kzalloc() and list_del

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

Date:	Thu, 13 Jun 2013 11:13:23 +0800
From:	Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>
To:	Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@...gle.com>
CC:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	<cgroups@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] cgroup: use kzalloc() and list_del_init()

On 2013/6/13 10:38, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 10:36:40AM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
>> On 2013/6/13 5:03, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>> There's no point in using kmalloc() and list_del() instead of the
>>> clearing variants for trivial stuff.  We can live dangerously
>>> elsewhere.  Use kzalloc() and list_del_init() instead and drop 0
>>> inits.
>>>
>>
>> Do you mean we prefer list_del_init() than list_del() in general? Then
>> in which cases do we prefer list_del()?
> 
> IMO, list_del() is preferred when the object shouldn't be reused (i.e.
> it gets taken off a list and then it's freed).

yeah, this is what I have in my mind. I would wonder why list_del_init()
if I know that object won't be used anymore.

> list_del_init() could
> hide bugs.
> 

Same here. I do worry a bit about this.

--
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/