| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 00:10:34 +0200 From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> To: cl@...ux-foundation.org CC: miklos@...redi.hu, penberg@...helsinki.fi, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, hugh@...itas.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org Subject: Re: SLUB defrag pull request? On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > >> Actually, when debugging is enabled, it's customary to poison the > >> object, for example (see free_debug_processing() in mm/slub.c). So we > >> really can't "easily ensure" that in the allocator unless we by-pass > >> all the current debugging code. > > Plus the allocator may be reusing parts of the freed object for a freelist > etc even if the object is not poisoned. Actually, no: looking at the slub code it already makes sure that objects are neither poisoned, nor touched in any way _if_ there is a constructor for the object. And for good reason too, otherwise a reused object would contain rubbish after a second allocation. Come on guys, you should be the experts in this thing! So again, just checking d_lru should do work fine. There's absolutely no need to mess with extra references in a separate phase, which leads to lots of complications. 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists