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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <46C23520.2070805@shaw.ca>
Date:	Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:05:04 -0600
From:	Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>
To:	Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>
Cc:	linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kfree(0) - ok?

Tim Bird wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I have a quick question.
> 
> I'm trying to resurrect a patch from the Linux-tiny patch suite,
> to do accounting of kmalloc memory allocations.  In testing it
> with Linux 2.6.22, I've found a large number of kfrees of
> NULL pointers.
> 
> Is this considered OK?  Or should I examine the offenders
> to see if something is coded badly?

It's perfectly correct to do it - though, if it's done very frequently 
in certain cases, it might be more efficient to check for null before 
the kfree, to avoid the function call overhead into kfree..

-- 
Robert Hancock      Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove "nospam" from hancockr@...pamshaw.ca
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/

-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ