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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:05:44 +0800 From: qzhang2 <qiang.zhang@...driver.com> To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [v2] workqueue: Fix double kfree for rescuer Thanks for your advice. The rescuer null pointer is intentionally passed by a data structure? and also I read the code of workqueue again, when destroy_workqueue is called, after "wq->rescuer = NULL" was executed, The scenario described below does not happen "if non-null pointers (according to valid rescuer objects) are occasionally passed by the corresponding data structure member for the callback function "rcu_free_wq"." On 5/25/20 6:40 PM, Markus Elfring wrote: >> I see, kfree does nothing with null pointers and direct return. >> but again kfree is not a good suggestion. > > I have got the impression that the implementation detail is important here > if non-null pointers (according to valid rescuer objects) are occasionally > passed by the corresponding data structure member for the callback > function “rcu_free_wq”. > Can another clarification attempt reduce unwanted confusion for this patch review? > > Regards, > Markus >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists