linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH mm] kfence, slab: fix cache_alloc_debugcheck

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAG_fn=Um2FW2m9y0iZ6J4L63-2bBVVrgu3hMQ0-GLwHxU6Hiiw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 5 Mar 2021 09:57:58 +0100
From:   Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Dmitriy Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mm] kfence, slab: fix cache_alloc_debugcheck_after() for
 bulk allocations

On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 2:31 AM Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 22:05:48 +0100 Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 9:53 PM Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > cache_alloc_debugcheck_after() performs checks on an object, including
> > > adjusting the returned pointer. None of this should apply to KFENCE
> > > objects. While for non-bulk allocations, the checks are skipped when we
> > > allocate via KFENCE, for bulk allocations cache_alloc_debugcheck_after()
> > > is called via cache_alloc_debugcheck_after_bulk().
> >
> > @Andrew, is this code used by anyone?
> > As far as I understand, it cannot be enabled by any config option, so
> > nobody really tests it.
> > If it is still needed, shall we promote #if DEBUGs in slab.c to a
> > separate config option, or maybe this code can be safely removed?
>
> It's all used:

Got it, sorry for being too hasty!