linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] futex: Prevent pi_state from double freeing in case of error

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: <20151221174232.GH17386@linux-uzut.site>
Date:	Mon, 21 Dec 2015 09:42:32 -0800
From:	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To:	Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Bhuvanesh_Surachari@...tor.com,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux@...musvillemoes.dk, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
	luto@...capital.net, Sebastian Sewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	mtk.manpages@...il.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andy Lowe <Andy_Lowe@...tor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] futex: Prevent pi_state from double freeing in case of
 error

On Sat, 19 Dec 2015, Darren Hart wrote:

>On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 07:24:38PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>  - Why are the reviews so sloppy and useless?
>>
>>    The one I'm answering to is just hillarious and the other one picks
>>    a random commit, claims that it inadvertantly introduced the issue
>>    and is done with it. Really helpful.
>>
>> Folks, this is not the way it works. It took me a couple of hours to
>> get this analyzed properly, but I don't see that anyone involved in
>> this thread has spent more than a few seconds on it.
>>
>> At least I found a real issue related to this refcount stuff, but I
>> would have preferred that the people involved in this would have found
>> it in the first place instead of providing half baken crap.
>>
>> Yours grumpy
>>
>>       tglx
>
>More care was clearly warranted on my part. I thought I saw the connection with
>the previous commit I referenced (it wasn't random!), but clearly didn't dig
>deep enough.

Same here. I hadn't looked at it long enough, so while I was hesitant of sending
a full review/ack, I should not have sent a half-arse answer either. Apologies.

Thanks,
Davidlohr
--
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/