linux-kernel - Re: kmem_cache_destroy() badness with SLUB

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: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1006291046230.16135@router.home>
Date:	Tue, 29 Jun 2010 10:47:09 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kmem_cache_destroy() badness with SLUB

On Mon, 28 Jun 2010, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

> So if the slab is created -and- destroyed at, for example, arch_initcall
> time, then we hit a WARN in the kobject code, trying to dispose of a
> non-existing kobject.

Yes dont do that.

> Now, at first sight, just adding the same test to sysfs_slab_remove()
> would do the job... but it all seems very racy to me.

Yes lets leave as is. Dont remove slabs during boot.

> Shouldn't we have a mutex around those guys ?

At boot time?

--
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/