linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] debugobject: fix concurrency issues with is_static

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:   Wed, 22 Mar 2023 22:17:21 +0100
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Schspa Shi <schspa@...il.com>
Cc:     longman@...hat.com, swboyd@...omium.org, linux@...ck-us.net,
        wuchi.zero@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        syzbot+5093ba19745994288b53@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] debugobject: fix concurrency issues with
 is_static_object

On Thu, Mar 23 2023 at 01:55, Schspa Shi wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> writes:
>> Which requirement? The is_static_object() call takes the address of the
>> actual object and has nothing to do with the tracking object at all.
>>
>
> This is for the fellowing test case, actually we calls
> debug_object_free() from a static object in our selftest, if we don't
> report any thing when call debug_object_free from a static object, we
> there is no such issues.

That's an artifical and completely pointless test case. As I told you
before the memory subsystem will warn when it's tried to free a static
object. debug_objects_free() is invoked from the memory subsystem *free*
functions.

What is the value of another warning?

Nothing at all.

So why would we add extra code just to keep track of something
completely redundant?

Thanks,

        tglx