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  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:	Sun, 8 Nov 2015 00:58:50 +0900
From:	Tetsuo Handa <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: use kmalloc() than kmalloc_array().

Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Commit 095dc8e0c3686d58 ("tcp: fix/cleanup inet_ehash_locks_alloc()")
> silently changed from kmalloc() to kmalloc_array(). The latter has
> overflow check whereas the former doesn't have.
> If nblocks * locksz might overflow, we need to do like
>   -  if (!hashinfo->ehash_locks && nblocks > SIZE_MAX / locksz)
>   +  if (!hashinfo->ehash_locks && nblocks > SIZE_MAX / locksz)

Oops, I meant

   -  if (!hashinfo->ehash_locks)
   +  if (!hashinfo->ehash_locks && nblocks > SIZE_MAX / locksz)


>        hashinfo->ehash_locks = vmalloc(nblocks * locksz);
> because kmalloc_array() detects overflow and returns NULL.
> But if nblocks * locksz is guaranteed not to overflow, there is
> no need to use kmalloc_array().
> Since I assume it won't overflow, use kmalloc() than kmalloc_array().

I don't know about possible value range.
Please confirm that it can't overflow.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists