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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzbN2xovoTyQeK1sHZdB-YMeiC=U7oOmUcpcb5_ZHEcFgA@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 10:13:41 -0800 From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com> To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org> Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, paul@...l-moore.com, brauner@...nel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, keescook@...omium.org, kernel-team@...a.com, sargun@...gun.me Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 bpf-next 02/17] bpf: add BPF token delegation mount options to BPF FS On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:03 AM Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 8:37 AM Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 11:03:54AM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > @@ -764,7 +817,10 @@ static int bpf_get_tree(struct fs_context *fc) > > > > > > static void bpf_free_fc(struct fs_context *fc) > > > { > > > - kfree(fc->fs_private); > > > + struct bpf_mount_opts *opts = fc->s_fs_info; > > > + > > > + if (opts) > > > + kfree(opts); > > > } > > > > Hi Andrii, > > > > as it looks like there will be a v12, I have a minor nit to report: There > > is no need to check if opts is non-NULL because kfree() is basically a > > no-op if it's argument is NULL. > > > > So perhaps this can become (completely untested!): > > > > static void bpf_free_fc(struct fs_context *fc) > > { > > kfree(fc->s_fs_info); > > } > > > > sure, I can drop the check, I wasn't sure if it's canonical or not to > check the argument for NULL before calling kfree(). For user-space > it's definitely quite expected to not have to check for null before > calling free(). Heh, turns out I already simplified this, but it's in the next patch. I'll move it into patch #2, though, where it actually belongs. > > > > ...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists