linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] kmemleak: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in two functions

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: <8e1d5cce-3661-44cc-ea1c-ac754513cde4@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:   Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:40:04 +0200
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kmemleak: Delete an error message for a failed memory
 allocation in two functions

>> +++ b/mm/kmemleak.c
>> @@ -555,7 +555,6 @@ static struct kmemleak_object *create_object(unsigned long ptr, size_t size,
>>  
>>  	object = kmem_cache_alloc(object_cache, gfp_kmemleak_mask(gfp));
>>  	if (!object) {
>> -		pr_warn("Cannot allocate a kmemleak_object structure\n");
>>  		kmemleak_disable();
> 
> I don't really get what this patch is trying to achieve.

I suggest to reduce the code size a bit.


> Given that kmemleak will be disabled after this,

I have got difficulties to interpret this information.


> I'd rather know why it happened.

Do you find the default allocation failure report sufficient?

Regards,
Markus