linux-kernel - Re: Buggy __free(kfree) usage pattern already in tree

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: <CAHk-=whO1+-4ALjFWSE0kzytz1kEbWPvy3xWvcUP1dJ4t-QqkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Sep 2023 10:04:10 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Buggy __free(kfree) usage pattern already in tree

On Fri, 15 Sept 2023 at 02:56, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> wrote:
>
> __free() got some usage and some of the usage is buggy:

Yeah, that's sad.

I think the '__free(kfree)' thing should *only* be used in the form

        struct obj *p __free(kfree) = kmalloc(...);

which is what our docs mention. Anything else is simply buggy.

But how do we *notice* this?

I do want to stress how I was unhappy about this conversion to begin with

    https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wigZt6kVkY0HU1j_LJ5H1KzwPiYnwwk6CbqXqT=sGenjg@mail.gmail.com/

but I reacted to the wrong issue.

This stuff needs to be done *way* more carefully.

              Linus