linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lib/kobject: put kobject if kobject_add

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d82e647a0907260232i148c2a3fhb69d61faad01b6e7@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:32:13 +0800
From:	Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
To:	Xiaotian Feng <xtfeng@...il.com>
Cc:	Xiaotian Feng <dfeng@...hat.com>, gregkh@...e.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/kobject: put kobject if kobject_add_internal fails

2009/7/25 Xiaotian Feng <xtfeng@...il.com>:
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com> wrote:
>> Even you can make sure _all_ .release of the passed kobj_type does not
>> free
>> the kobject, you still have the double calling of kobject_put problem,
>> don't you?
>
>
> hmm, how about change kobject_put to kfree(kobj->name) ? Then it's safe for
> both cases, right?

No, it is very buggy and ugly to kfree kobj->name directly by kobject
users instead
of kobject_put().  Image that someone uses the kobject after kfree(kobj->name)
but before kobject_put,  oops may happen.

Why don't you fix the 20+ callers of  kobject_init_and_add?  It is the
standard way of doing
such thing.

-- 
Lei Ming
--
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/