linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tracing: remove unreachable trace_array

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: <98c01cc6-dcee-46d0-bdc8-0e35165ec68b@ancud.ru>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 16:47:36 +0300
From: Nikita Kiryushin <kiryushin@...ud.ru>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
 Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 lvc-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: remove unreachable trace_array_put

As nonseekable_open() documentation states:
"The function is not supposed to ever fail, the only
reason it returns an 'int' and not 'void' is so that it can be plugged
directly into file_operations structure."

So it seems, that it will not fail anytime as it is not meant to? Otherwise,
there will be a huge problem with leaks in many other parts of code, as
there are plenty of places, where nonseekable_open() is not checked after
resource allocations.

On 7/13/24 02:33, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Then why does it return a value?
>
> If someday it can return a failure, this would then cause a leak. It
> doesn't hurt to leave it in.
>
> So NACK.
>
> -- Steve
>