linux-kernel - Re: Possible bug in ftrace_profile_enable

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: <1254378035.2194.37.camel@frodo>
Date:	Thu, 01 Oct 2009 02:20:35 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Possible bug in ftrace_profile_enable_event

On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 14:50 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:

> So we only allocate trace_profile_buf and trace_profile_buf_nmi if
> total_profile_count was zero on entry, but if we get an error returned
> from event->profile_enable(), we free them both unconditionally,
> regardless of the value of total_profile_count.  That seems wrong.  Is
> there a subtle reason why that is the right thing to do?
> 
> (Also, is kfree the appropriate counterpart to alloc_percpu?)

Hi Paul,

I think you have a valid point. Frederic and I are here in Dresden (last
day). I'll make sure he sees this.

Thanks,

-- 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/