[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YuJEozyceOKQ63/6@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 11:11:15 +0300
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: Siddh Raman Pant <code@...dh.me>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
keyrings <keyrings@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-modules <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel-mentees
<linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] keys/keyctl: Use kfree_rcu instead of kfree
On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 07:20:35PM +0530, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> In keyctl_watch_key, use kfree_rcu() for freeing watch and wlist
> as they support RCU and have an rcu_head in the struct definition.
>
> Signed-off-by: Siddh Raman Pant <code@...dh.me>
Applies to any patch: the commit message should *clearly* describe
1. What is wrong in the current code *behaviour*.
2. Why does the code change save the day.
> ---
> security/keys/keyctl.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/keys/keyctl.c b/security/keys/keyctl.c
> index 96a92a645216..087fbc141cfd 100644
> --- a/security/keys/keyctl.c
> +++ b/security/keys/keyctl.c
> @@ -1832,9 +1832,9 @@ long keyctl_watch_key(key_serial_t id, int watch_queue_fd, int watch_id)
> }
>
> err_watch:
> - kfree(watch);
> + kfree_rcu(watch, rcu);
> err_wlist:
> - kfree(wlist);
> + kfree_rcu(wlist, rcu);
> err_wqueue:
> put_watch_queue(wqueue);
> err_key:
> --
> 2.35.1
>
>
BR, Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists