linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] cgroup: implement eventfd-based generic API for notifications

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: <4B46828C.5000703@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Fri, 08 Jan 2010 08:55:40 +0800
From:	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
To:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
CC:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	Dan Malek <dan@...eddedalley.com>,
	Vladislav Buzov <vbuzov@...eddedalley.com>,
	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
	Alexander Shishkin <virtuoso@...nd.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] cgroup: implement eventfd-based generic API for
 	notifications

Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 3:01 AM, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 7:57 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov
>> <kirill@...temov.name> wrote:
>>> +
>>> +       if (!IS_ERR(efile))
>>> +               fput(efile);
>> While this is OK currently, it's a bit fragile. efile starts as NULL,
>> and IS_ERR(NULL) is false. So if we jump to fail: before trying to do
>> the eventfd_fget() then we'll try to fput(NULL), which will oops. This
>> works because we don't currently jump to fail: until after
>> eventfd_fget(), but someone could add an extra setup step between the
>> kzalloc() and the eventfd_fget() which could fail.
> 
> So we need to use IS_ERR_OR_NULL here instread of IS_ERR, don't we?
> 

Use multi labels is much better:

label4::
	fput(cfile);
label3:
	eventfd_ctx_put(event->eventfd);
label2:
	fput(efile);
label1:
	kfree(event);

compared to:

+fail:
+	if (!IS_ERR(cfile))
+		fput(cfile);
+
+	if (event && event->eventfd && !IS_ERR(event->eventfd))
+		eventfd_ctx_put(event->eventfd);
+
+	if (!IS_ERR(efile))
+		fput(efile);
+
+	kfree(event);

--
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/