linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] kunit: make kunit_kfree(NULL) a no-op to match kfree()

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]

Date:   Wed, 5 Oct 2022 16:40:54 -0400
From:   Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
To:     Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>
Cc:     davidgow@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        skhan@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] kunit: make kunit_kfree(NULL) a no-op to match kfree()

On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 1:15 PM Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> The real kfree() function will silently return when given a NULL.
> So a user might reasonably think they can write the following code:
>   char *buffer = NULL;
>   if (param->use_buffer) buffer = kunit_kzalloc(test, 10, GFP_KERNEL);
>   ...
>   kunit_kfree(test, buffer);
>
> As-is, kunit_kfree() will mark the test as FAILED when buffer is NULL.
> (And in earlier times, it would segfault).
>
> Let's match the semantics of kfree().
>
> Suggested-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>

Reviewed-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>