linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/15] kmemleak: Add the slab 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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0812181541140.19680@quilx.com>
Date:	Thu, 18 Dec 2008 15:41:55 -0600 (CST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
cc:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/15] kmemleak: Add the slab memory allocation/freeing
 hooks

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> For kmemleak, that's a problem. Unless we explicitly annotate the
> caches, it will scan them and think that there's a pointer to a leaked
> object (i.e. false negative). Catalin already took care of the per-CPU
> caches but AFAICT we still need to take care of the per-node caches
> and the shared caches.

Why doesnt kmemleak simply use the counter as a boundary and only access
those pointers that are valid?

--
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/