lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC 0/4] CONFIG_STABLE to switch off development checks
From
Date
On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 09:28 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> > I'm on Christoph's side here. I don't think it makes sense for any code
> > to ask to allocate zero bytes of memory and expect valid memory to be
> > returned.
> >
>
> Yes, everyone agrees on that. If you do kmalloc(0), its never OK to
> dereference the result. The question is whether kmalloc(0) should complain.

Yeah, I see that you aren't necessarily asking for valid memory, just
something that appears valid. I'm still of the mind that if code is
asking for a zero-length allocation, it's raising a flag that it's not
taking some corner case into account. But I think I'm just
regurgitating what Christoph is arguing.

> > Would a compromise be to return a pointer to some known invalid region?
> > This way the kmalloc(0) call would appear successful to the caller, but
> > any access to the memory would result in an exception.
> >
>
> Yes, that's what Christoph has posted.

Oh. I went back and re-read the thread and it looks like you proposed
this already. I don't see where Christoph did, or agreed, but maybe I
missed something.

> I'm slightly concerned about
> kmalloc() returning the same non-NULL address multiple times, but it
> seems sound otherwise.

If the caller is asking for 0 bytes, it shouldn't be doing anything with
the returned address except checking for a NULL return. But then, it's
hard to predict everything that calling code might be doing, such as
allocating buffers and creating a hash based on their addresses. Of
course, if there's code that would have a problem with it, I think it's
a further argument that it would be better off avoiding the calling
kmalloc(0) in the first place.

Shaggy
--
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-06-04 03:07    [W:0.141 / U:0.376 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site