linux-kernel - Re: kmalloc() with size zero

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, 29 Mar 2007 10:39:10 -0400
From:	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
To:	eranian@....hp.com
CC:	Folkert van Heusden <folkert@...heusden.com>,
	Vignesh Babu BM <vignesh.babu@...ro.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	ak@...e.de, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
Subject: Re: kmalloc() with size zero

Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 06:30:34PM +0200, Folkert van Heusden wrote:
>>>> I'd say "feature", glibc's malloc also returns an address on
>>>> malloc(0).
>>>>
>>> This is implementation defined-the standard allows for return of either
>>> null or an address.
>> Entirely for entertainment: AIX (5.3) returns NULL, IRIX returns a valid
>> address.
>>
> That's interesting, so many different behaviors! Personally, I still prefer
> when malloc(0) returns zero because it makes it easier to catch errors.
> 
Exactly, the address returned is not really useful, the improved error 
checking is useful.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot
-
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/