[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <573091CD.4080503@virtuozzo.com>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 16:34:05 +0300
From: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>
To: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
CC: "Luruo, Kuthonuzo" <kuthonuzo.luruo@....com>,
"glider@...gle.com" <glider@...gle.com>,
"cl@...ux.com" <cl@...ux.com>,
"penberg@...nel.org" <penberg@...nel.org>,
"rientjes@...gle.com" <rientjes@...gle.com>,
"iamjoonsoo.kim@....com" <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"kasan-dev@...glegroups.com" <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm, kasan: improve double-free detection
On 05/09/2016 04:20 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 05/09/2016 02:35 PM, Luruo, Kuthonuzo wrote:
>>>
>>> This patch with atomic bit op is similar in spirit to v1 except that it increases metadata size.
>>>
>>
>> I don't think that this is a big deal. That will slightly increase size of objects <= (128 - 32) bytes.
>> And if someone think otherwise, we can completely remove 'alloc_size'
>> (we use it only to print size in report - not very useful).
>
>
> Where did 128 come from?
> We now should allocate only 32 bytes for 16-byte user object. If not,
> there is something to fix.
>
I just said this wrong. I mean that the patch increases size of objects that have object_size <= (128 - 32).
For bigger objects, the new 'struct kasan_[alloc,free]_meta' still fits into optimal redzone.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists