linux-kernel - Re: Q. d_alloc() in pipe(2)

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: <20091229150235.GA2927@hack>
Date:	Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:02:35 +0800
From:	Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:	hooanon05@...oo.co.jp
Cc:	viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Q. d_alloc() in pipe(2)

On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 02:55:20PM +0900, hooanon05@...oo.co.jp wrote:
>
>In pipe(2), create_write_pipe() creates a dentry by
>	struct qstr name = { .name = "" };
>	d_alloc(root, &name);
>
>But d_alloc() refers name->len which is uninitialized.

Well, it is initialized to 0. :)

>Isn't it better to replace d_alloc() by d_alloc_name(root, "")?
>

Maybe not, they totally equal in this case, IMO.

-- 
Live like a child, think like the god.

--
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/