linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] type safe allocator

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: <E1IGAiD-0006Qf-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Date:	Wed, 01 Aug 2007 11:41:49 +0200
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	bunk@...sta.de
CC:	miklos@...redi.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] type safe allocator

> > I wonder why we don't have type safe object allocators a-la new() in
> > C++ or g_new() in glib?
> > 
> >   fooptr = k_new(struct foo, GFP_KERNEL);
> > 
> > is nicer and more descriptive than
> > 
> >   fooptr = kmalloc(sizeof(*fooptr), GFP_KERNEL);
> >...
> 
> But it's much more likely to break when someone converts fooptr to a 
> different struct.
> 
> It might not be a common case but it sometimes happens - and your type 
> safe variant introduces the possibility for really nasty bugs.

The compiler would emit a warning about assigning to a pointer of
different type.  That's a fairly strong hint that something just
broke.

Miklos
-
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/