linux-kernel - Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.0.99.0706012220140.1820@sigma.j-a-k-j.com>
Date:	Fri, 1 Jun 2007 22:21:34 -0400 (EDT)
From:	"John Anthony Kazos Jr." <jakj@...-k-j.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Subject: Re: SLUB: Return ZERO_SIZE_PTR for kmalloc(0)

> > > +	 * The behavior for zero sized allocs changes. We no longer
> > > +	 * allocate memory but return ZERO_SIZE_PTR.
> > > +	 * WARN so that people can review and fix their code.
> > 
> > I don't see why people have so much opposition to zero-size memory 
> > allocations. There's all sorts of situations where you want a resizeable 
> > array that may have zero objects, especially in these days of 
> > hotpluggability.
> 
> In case you have not read the description to the end: This patch does 
> exactly what you want and legitimizes zero size object use. The warning 
> will be remove before 2.6.22 is released.

Ah, sorry then. I just saw this, and remembered a rather contrary 
discussion about it quite a time ago. Excellent then.
-
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/