linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 03/57] locking: Introduce _

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]

Message-ID: <CAMRc=MegBEQ1Anfh5UJe=OH0U_VX9ijMeh_hoWKxDyB511stsA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 Aug 2023 09:24:44 +0200
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, keescook@...omium.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        masahiroy@...nel.org, nathan@...nel.org, ndesaulniers@...gle.com,
        nicolas@...sle.eu, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
        vkoul@...nel.org, trix@...hat.com, ojeda@...nel.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, longman@...hat.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
        dennis@...nel.org, tj@...nel.org, cl@...ux.com, acme@...nel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
        jolsa@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org, irogers@...gle.com,
        adrian.hunter@...el.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
        bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com, paulmck@...nel.org,
        frederic@...nel.org, quic_neeraju@...cinc.com,
        joel@...lfernandes.org, josh@...htriplett.org,
        mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
        rientjes@...gle.com, vbabka@...e.cz, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
        42.hyeyoo@...il.com, apw@...onical.com, joe@...ches.com,
        dwaipayanray1@...il.com, lukas.bulwahn@...il.com,
        john.johansen@...onical.com, paul@...l-moore.com,
        jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
        llvm@...ts.linux.dev, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        rcu@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, ravi.bangoria@....com, error27@...il.com,
        luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com, Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/57] locking: Introduce __cleanup() based infrastructure

On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 11:56 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>

[snip]

> --- a/include/linux/slab.h
> +++ b/include/linux/slab.h
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>  #include <linux/types.h>
>  #include <linux/workqueue.h>
>  #include <linux/percpu-refcount.h>
> +#include <linux/cleanup.h>
>
>
>  /*
> @@ -211,6 +212,8 @@ void kfree(const void *objp);
>  void kfree_sensitive(const void *objp);
>  size_t __ksize(const void *objp);
>
> +DEFINE_FREE(kfree, void *, if (_T) kfree(_T))
> +

Peter,

Yuri Norov pointed out to me (under a different cleanup patch) that
kfree() handles NULL-pointers and there's no reason to check it again
in DEFINE_FREE() macros. It seems right to me but I wanted to run it
by you and check if there is maybe some reason I'm not seeing to doing
it?

Bartosz

[snip]