| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:00:21 +0100 From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com> To: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: flex_array related problems on selinux policy loading On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 08:57:29AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > > > > > You have to check for and handle those allocation failures anyway. > > > > If we just return a pointer to the user that notifies that this was a > > zerro size allocation, we would not need to allocate anything (like > > kmalloc does), so we can't get allocation failures. > > Could you point me to some of this code? I'm having a hard time seeing > how this is going to get used, and I don't see any use of > ZERO_SIZE_PTR/ZERO_OR_NULL_PTR() outside of the sl*b code. > Perhaps I did not express it the right way, but I did not say that this is used somewhere outside the sl*b code. All I meant is that we return a pointer, like ZERO_SIZE_PTR that notifies us that we have not allocated anything if a user wants to access or to free data. This pointers are just for internal usage of course. Steffen -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists