linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/3] MAP_NOZERO

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: <a36005b50706262204s2a6decds70bd56955217de13@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:04:11 -0700
From:	"Ulrich Drepper" <drepper@...il.com>
To:	"Rik van Riel" <riel@...hat.com>
Cc:	"Davide Libenzi" <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] MAP_NOZERO - implement sys_brk2()

On 6/26/07, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> wrote:
> After going through the first malloc()/free() cycle, surely
> the memory will no longer be zeroed on the second malloc() ?

If returned to the system, sure.

> What makes the first brk malloc so special?

If the memory is zeroed it needs not be initialized by malloc.  No
calloc zeroing, no pointer clearing.

Anyway, it's irrelevant what the benefits are, the fact is current
code depends on brk to zero the memory and you'd break the ABI if
you'd change it.
-
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/