linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] xdp_rxq_info_user: Replace malloc/memset w/calloc

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]

Date:   Fri, 12 Jun 2020 14:06:50 +0200
From:   Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@...hat.com>,
        Gaurav Singh <gaurav1086@...il.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>,
        "open list\:XDP \(eXpress Data Path\)" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list\:XDP \(eXpress Data Path\)" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xdp_rxq_info_user: Replace malloc/memset w/calloc

Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> writes:

> On Fri, 2020-06-12 at 08:42 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 20:36:40 -0400
>> Gaurav Singh <gaurav1086@...il.com> wrote:
>> 
>> > Replace malloc/memset with calloc
>> > 
>> > Fixes: 0fca931a6f21 ("samples/bpf: program demonstrating access to xdp_rxq_info")
>> > Signed-off-by: Gaurav Singh <gaurav1086@...il.com>
>> 
>> Above is the correct use of Fixes + Signed-off-by.
>> 
>> Now you need to update/improve the description, to also
>> mention/describe that this also solves the bug you found.
>
> This is not a fix, it's a conversion of one
> correct code to a shorter one.

No it isn't - the original code memset()s before it checks the return
from malloc(), so it's a potential NULL-pointer reference... Which the
commit message should explain, obviously :)

-Toke