linux-kernel - Re: fs: dcookie: freeing active timer

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]

Date:	Thu, 24 Apr 2014 22:55:58 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
Cc:	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: fs: dcookie: freeing active timer

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 01:34:14PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:

> > Why does that code bother with destroying/creating that sucker dynamically?
> > Is there any point at all?
> 
> I'm not sure about the dynamic allocation part, but I fear that if we just
> switch to using static allocations it'll hide the underlying issue that
> triggered this bug instead of fixing it.

FWIW, slub.c variant of kmem_cache_destroy() is buggered - struct kobject
embedded into struct kmem_cache, its ktype is slab_ktype, which has
NULL ->release()...
--
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/