[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0808271747160.15543@abydos.NerdBox.Net>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 17:58:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Steve VanDeBogart <vandebo-lkml@...dBox.Net>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] exit signals: use of uninitialized field notify_count
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> * Steve VanDeBogart <vandebo-lkml@...dBox.Net> wrote:
>>
>>> task->signal->notify_count is only initialized if
>>> task->signal->group_exit_task is not NULL. Reorder a conditional so
>>> that uninitialised memory is not used. Found by Valgrind.
>
> Minor comment. As Roland pointed out, it makes sense to initialize
> the whole signal_struct explicitely, perhaps copy_signal() should
> just use zalloc. In that case we don't need to check ->group_exit_task
> at all, the same for __exit_signal().
>
> Thanks Steve! and what do you think about the above?
It looks like that would work. Seems that
sig->count == 0 && sig->group_exit_task != NULL can never be true.
If it does work, a lot of initialization in copy_signal() can be
removed and it would reduce the chances that a similar problem would be
reintroduced. I would submit a patch, but I'm not sure how to trigger
those code paths in order to test it.
--
Steve
--
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