[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b0943d9e0703090853i6deb0581wec7e962d0d76b9df@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 16:53:39 +0000
From: "Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@...il.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Possible "struct pid" leak from tty_io.c
On 09/03/07, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
> "Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@...il.com> writes:
>
> > On 08/03/07, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
> >> "Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@...il.com> writes:
> >
> > I think it's only the pid_chain and rcu member that could be placed in
> > a list and kmemleak scans the memory for these two offsets as well.
> > I'll check those lists anyway but I doubt it's a more fundamental
> > problem with how kmemleak handles struct pid as I should've probably
> > got more reports.
>
> Right. I was pointing out the possibilities but because we do
> some tricky things. Mostly I was wondering about the hlist for
> the list of tasks. Now if a task is on that list we should have
> a struct pid_link pointing at our struct pid, so it shouldn't fool
> kmemleak but I'm still a little curious if all of those hlist_heads are
> NULL pointers.
Yes, all the 3 hlist_head tasks are NULL pointers on the reported object.
--
Catalin
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists