linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/3] SLUB: make ksize() more strict for page allocator pass-through

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]

Date:	Thu, 22 May 2008 00:15:39 +0300
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mpm@...enic.com, lethal@...ux-sh.org,
	dhowells@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/3] SLUB: make ksize() more strict for page allocator
 pass-through

Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> Hmm, where? page_address() already references ->virtual. I suppose
>> CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is a no no as well then so do we want to add a
>> CONFIG_KSIZE_DEBUG config option...? (Btw, I removed the BUG_ON() from kfree()
>> as spotted by Vegard Nossum.)
> 
> If it has to be then add CONFIG_KSIZE_DEBUG. There are a number of 
> debugging techniques (kmem_check?) that should not be compiled in. Maybe 
> add a new config option for those. CONFIG_SLUB_ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_DEBUG?

Oh, kmemcheck is a separate config option already and it's *much much* 
more expensive than the ksize() checks will ever be so they shouldn't be 
bundled together anyway.

		Pekka
--
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/