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: <1210108320.9305.4.camel@johannes.berg>
Date:	Tue, 06 May 2008 23:12:00 +0200
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Ingo Oeser <netdev@...eo.de>
Cc:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4][MAC80211]: Fix GFP_KERNEL allocation under read
	lock.


> What about doing both allocations in succession to local variables,
> share the failure path if an error occours an kfree them unconditionally 
> like this?
> 
> new_node = kmalloc(sizeof(struct mpath_node), GFP_KERNEL);
> new_mpath = kzalloc(sizeof(struct mesh_path), GFP_KERNEL);

If the system is under enough pressure to fail the first allocation, do
we really want to try another one just to free things again right away?
I'm with Pavel here, let's rather clean up the failure code path.

johannes

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ