linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: do not free zero sized per cpu areas

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4BA3EFAE.9070004@zytor.com>
Date:	Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:42:06 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: do not free zero sized per cpu areas

On 03/19/2010 12:24 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>
> 
> This avoids an infinite loop in free_early_partial().
> 
> Add a warning to free_early_partial to catch future problems.

Wouldn't it make more sense to simply make free_early_partial() a noop
for the zero range, instead of pushing all those tests into the callers?
 It still might make sense to have a WARN_ONCE() for a *negative* range,
however...

	-hpa
--
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/