linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mtd: Add simple read disturb test

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: <CAOMZO5BpX0LHOmkPpsOHn+7x-VBzAnjuG0ed_n4OTe6_g0O2mQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 2 Apr 2015 11:45:00 -0300
From:	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>
To:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc:	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
	"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: Add simple read disturb test

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at> wrote:

> Why? Free()ing a NULL pointer is perfectly fine.
> What did I miss? :)

If the first 'iobuf = kmalloc(mtd->erasesize, GFP_KERNEL);' fails then
you jump to the out label where you call 5 kfree() and then return the
error.

It would be much better just to return the error immediately in this
case and add one label for each allocation error, so that it only
kfree the previous successful allocations.
--
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/