Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:19:24 -0500 (CDT) | From | Christoph Lameter <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 07/11] Memory compaction core |
| |
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > ...except that we've seen a fair number of null pointer dereference > > exploits that have told us something altogether different. Are we > > *sure* we don't want to test for null pointers...? > > > > It's hard to see what the test gains us really - the kernel has > zillions of pointer derefs, any of which could be NULL if we have a > bug. Are we more likely to have a bug here than elsewhere? > > This one will oops on a plain old read, so it's a bit moot in this > case.
If the object pointed to is larger than page size and we are referencing a member with an offset larger than page size later then we may create an exploit without checks.
But the structure here is certainly smaller than that. So no issue here.
| |