linux-kernel - Re: semantics of rhashtable and sysvipc

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: <20180523183103.cdgv4slom62y56wi@linux-n805>
Date:   Wed, 23 May 2018 11:31:03 -0700
From:   Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
        guillaume.knispel@...ersonicimagine.com,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: semantics of rhashtable and sysvipc

On Wed, 23 May 2018, Linus Torvalds wrote:

>So I'm perfectly fine with getting rid of 'tables_initialized'. But no, not
>with a BUG_ON().
>
>If you cannot guarantee that the allocation works (using __GFP_NOFAIL is
>ok, for example - but it only works with small allocations), then you need
>to handle the allocation failure.

Note that even if the allocation was guaranteed, there are still param validations
and rhashtable_init() can return -EINVAL.