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  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:   Fri, 17 Feb 2017 09:07:53 -0800
From:   Andy Lutomirski <>
To:     "Luis R. Rodriguez" <>
Cc:     Michal Hocko <>,
        Andrew Morton <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>,
        Andy Lutomirski <>,
        Kees Cook <>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <>,
        Mateusz Guzik <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: kmemleak splat on copy_process()

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 09:03:43AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> On Tue 07-02-17 02:37:02, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> > > From a quick check I do not see any leak there either.
>> >
>> > Then in that case what about:
>> This just disables the kmemleak altogether which doesn't sound like a
>> good idea to me.
> Only for this case, but if that is also not desirable let us debug further.
> That or I think we could perhaps massage code to make it clearer to kmemleak
> things are good.

I'm not seeing the issue.  There should be a live pointer to stack at
all times, either in a local variable or in task->stack.  There's a
weird window in dup_task_struct in which we're stashing away
stack_vm_area, but stack itself should be okay, I think.  But maybe
there really is a race in which a kmemleak check right in the middle
of duplicating the task struct really can't see the stack pointer.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists