linux-kernel - Re: kmemleak - percpu reliability?

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1461750029.3723.5.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date:	Wed, 27 Apr 2016 11:40:29 +0200
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kmemleak - percpu reliability?

On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 10:38 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> 
> Kmemleak tries to reduce the false positives to the detriment of more
> false negatives. 

:)

> One way it does this is by having to scan the memory
> twice and no changes to the leaked object (crc32) should have
> happened. It also scans the task stacks which is another source of
> false/stale pointers. The leak may eventually be reported but you
> can't really be precise on when this would be.
> 

Ok, fair enough. I don't remember if I asked it to scan twice, but
anyway, I did convince myself separately (with prints) that it was
leaked :)

Thanks for the explanation!

johannes