linux-kernel - Re: kfree(0)

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708171413190.9635@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:14:17 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Satyam Sharma <satyam@...radead.org>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>,
	linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kfree(0) - ok?

On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Satyam Sharma wrote:

> >  	page = get_object_page(object);
> 
> Hmm, I didn't know ksize(NULL) was also allowed to succeed (and
> return 0).

That was merged over my objections. IMHO ksize(NULL) should fail since we 
are determining the size of an unallocated object.

> Oh yes, of course. We want krealloc(NULL) cases to behave consistently 
> as expected, and letting ksize(NULL) return 0 means the code for 
> krealloc() can lose an extra "if (!p)" check that would otherwise have 
> been required. Cool.

krealloc should check for that.
-
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/