lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH BUGFIX -v2 -rc4] Smack: Respect 'unlabeled' netlabel mode
From
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 04:25:00PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 02:57:51 +0300
> "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwish.07@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > + mutex_lock(&smack_ambient_lock);
> > + nlsp->domain = kstrdup(smack_net_ambient, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > + mutex_unlock(&smack_ambient_lock);
>
> no no no no no. And no.
>
> GFP_ATOMIC is *unreliable*. Using it in a "security" feature is a bug
> - if it fails, the feature isn't secure any more.
>
> Failing to check the kmalloc() return value might be a bug.
>
> If we _need_ GFP_ATOMIC here then taking a mutex in a cannot-sleep
> context is a bug.
>
> The patch adds a kmalloc but doesn't add a kfree. Is it leaky?
>
> Finally, why is there a need to take a lock around a single store
> instruction?

Possibly the worst three lines written ever. GFP_ATOMIC line
was cut-and-paste forgetting to change it to GFP_KERNEL and the lock
is already useless.

--

"Better to light a candle, than curse the darkness"

Ahmed S. Darwish
Homepage: http://darwish.07.googlepages.com
Blog: http://darwish-07.blogspot.com



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-05-31 02:19    [W:0.098 / U:0.780 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site