linux-kernel - Re: Q, slab, kmemleak

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: <9890.1259737038@jrobl>
Date:	Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:57:18 +0900
From:	hooanon05@...oo.co.jp
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Q, slab, kmemleak_erase() and redzone? 


Pekka Enberg:
> > No, you are absolutely correct. Can you please send an updated patch to 
> > Catalin that adds a comment on top of the cpu_cache_get() call that 
> > explains why we need it there?
> 
> Doh, this was supposed to be a reply to Okajima's email :-).

Before I send a small patch, let me make sure about other small issues.

- How heavy is 'ac = cpu_cache_get(cachep)' (which will be inserted by
  the patch)?
  It will be compiled and executed regardless CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK, and
  it is totally meaningless when DEBUG_KMEMLEAK is disabled. Can we
  ignore this loss?

- Should we add a condition 'if (objp)' before calling kmemleak_erase()?
  As Catalin wrote, it may be harmless. But setting NULL is unnecessary.
  Do you accept this change too?


J. R. Okajima
--
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/