linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: kmemleak: Track the page allocations for struct request

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:	Wed, 25 Nov 2015 09:45:26 -0700
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	William Dauchy <wdauchy@...il.com>
Cc:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: kmemleak: Track the page allocations for struct
 request

On 11/25/2015 04:04 AM, William Dauchy wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
>> On 09/14/2015 11:16 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>>
>>> The pages allocated for struct request contain pointers to other slab
>>> allocations (via ops->init_request). Since kmemleak does not track/scan
>>> page allocations, the slab objects will be reported as leaks (false
>>> positives). This patch adds kmemleak callbacks to allow tracking of such
>>> pages.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
>>> Reported-by: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>
>>> Tested-by: Bart Van Assche<bart.vanassche@...disk.com>
>>> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
>>> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Jens,
>>>
>>> I just realised that no-one has picked this patch up for -rc1. It was
>>> discussed here previously:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150803104309.GB4033@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com
>>>
>>> Since it touches the block layer, are you fine with merging it?
>>
>>
>> Yeah looks simple enough for me, not sure why it got missed. I'll add it for
>> 4.4-rc1, thanks.
>
> I saw the related kmemleaks reports on my v4.1.x kernel. Since it's
> actually fixing these wrong reports, do you think it could be a good
> candidate for -stable tree?

I'd say it's borderline. It's fixing a tracking bug. Unless others feel 
strongly otherwise, I don't think it's stable material.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/