[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140616214313.GB1870@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:43:13 -0400
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, WANG Chao <chaowang@...hat.com>,
Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>, mjg59@...f.ucam.org,
bhe@...hat.com, jkosina@...e.cz, greg@...ah.com,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/13] kexec: Implementation of new syscall
kexec_file_load
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 02:25:07PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 06/16/2014 02:09 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >
> > Nah, I don't feel strongly about it - I just don't trust userspace and
> > think that every value we get from it should be "sanitized".
> >
>
> Borislav and I talked about this briefly over IRC. A key part of that
> is that if userspace could manipulate this system call to consume an
> unreasonable amount of memory, we would have a problem, for example if
> this code used vzalloc() instead of kzalloc(). However, since
> kmalloc/kzalloc implies a relatively restrictive limit on the memory
> allocation size anyway, well short of anything that could cause OOM
> problems, that pretty much solves the problem.
Actually currently I am using vzalloc() for command line buffer
allocation.
image->cmdline_buf = vzalloc(cmdline_len);
if (!image->cmdline_buf)
goto out;
Should I switch to using kzalloc() instead?
Thanks
Vivek
--
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