linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2.6.28-rc5 03/11] kmemleak: Add the memory allocation/freeing hooks

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:	Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:35:06 +0200
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.28-rc5 03/11] kmemleak: Add the memory
	allocation/freeing hooks

Hi Catalin,

On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 10:18 +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> My understanding is that the ->s_mem value points to the slab itself but
> the same pointer might actually be the beginning of an allocated memory
> block, hence we get at least one reference to this block.

Yes, ->s_mem points to the first object in the slab if CONFIG_DEBUG_SLAB
is disabled.

So if I understood this right, in case the first object in the slab is
leaked (it's allocated but no one references to it), we want to make
sure kmemleak doesn't see the ->s_mem link which would cause a false
negative (i.e. a leak that is not reported).

Did I get it correct this time?

		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/