[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1e4a6174-04be-6c05-fd6e-b43fefd317fc@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 22:16:04 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: Add kvfree_sensitive() for freeing sensitive data
objects
On 4/6/20 3:38 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 14:58 -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> For kvmalloc'ed data object that contains sensitive information like
>> cryptographic key, we need to make sure that the buffer is always
>> cleared before freeing it. Using memset() alone for buffer clearing may
>> not provide certainty as the compiler may compile it away. To be sure,
>> the special memzero_explicit() has to be used.
> []
>> extern void kvfree(const void *addr);
>> +extern void kvfree_sensitive(const void *addr, size_t len);
> Question: why should this be const?
>
> 2.1.44 changed kfree(void *) to kfree(const void *) but
> I didn't find a particular reason why.
I am just following the function prototype used by kvfree(). Even
kzfree(const void *) use const. I can remove "const" if others agree.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists