linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/12] kasan, mm: don't save alloc stacks twice

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:   Tue, 2 Feb 2021 19:40:56 +0100
From:   Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To:     Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@...gle.com>,
        Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
        Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@....com>,
        Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@....com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] kasan, mm: don't save alloc stacks twice

On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 at 19:01, 'Andrey Konovalov' via kasan-dev
<kasan-dev@...glegroups.com> wrote:
[...]
> > > @@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ static inline void kasan_disable_current(void) {}
> > >  struct kasan_cache {
> > >       int alloc_meta_offset;
> > >       int free_meta_offset;
> > > +     bool is_kmalloc;
[...]
> > >       if (kasan_stack_collection_enabled())
> > > -             set_alloc_info(cache, (void *)object, flags);
> > > +             set_alloc_info(cache, (void *)object, flags, kmalloc);
> >
> > It doesn't bother me too much, but: 'bool kmalloc' shadows function
> > 'kmalloc' so this is technically fine, but using 'kmalloc' as the
> > variable name here might be confusing and there is a small chance it
> > might cause problems in a future refactor.
>
> Good point. Does "is_kmalloc" sound good?

Sure, that's also consistent with the new struct field.

Thanks,
-- Marco