From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for binary_sysctl() memory leak
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:44:11 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111215144411.930dd860.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANN689EViJYxDRr48wK1=_Lpb62wB5tj4-fnN1-MY8y-1L33fw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:38:58 -0800
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Andrew Morton
> <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > I think the patch is correct but the description is misleading?
> >
> > I see no memory leak here. __Calling __putname() directly simply
> > bypasses some audit-related stuff.
>
> Hmmm, maybe I wasn't explicit enough about it. We are definitely
> seeing a memory leak without the patch.
>
> When auditing is enabled, putname() calls audit_putname *instead* (not
> in addition) to __putname(). Then, if a syscall is in progress,
> audit_putname does not release the name - instead, it expects the name
> to get released when the syscall completes, but that will happen only
> if audit_getname() was called previously, i.e. if the name was
> allocated with getname() rather than the naked __getname(). So,
> __getname() followed by putname() ends up leaking memory.
>
OK. Please resend with a new changelog?
The bug surprises me - it seems that it makes it trivial for userspace
to cause leaking of mad amounts of kernel memory, which would cause the
bug to be found and fixed quickly.
Is it a recent regression, or does the bug trigger only in weird
circumstances, or what?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-15 22:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-15 2:44 Michel Lespinasse
2011-12-15 22:19 ` Andrew Morton
2011-12-15 22:38 ` Michel Lespinasse
2011-12-15 22:44 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2011-12-15 22:59 ` Michel Lespinasse
2011-12-15 23:07 ` Michel Lespinasse
2011-12-17 22:14 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-12-18 1:23 ` Michel Lespinasse
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20111215144411.930dd860.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=walken@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome