From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Howells Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 15:46:40 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] mm/slab: Use memzero_explicit() in kzfree() Message-Id: <879079.1592322400@warthog.procyon.org.uk> List-Id: References: <56c2304c-73cc-8f48-d8d0-5dd6c39f33f3@redhat.com> <20200616015718.7812-1-longman@redhat.com> <20200616015718.7812-2-longman@redhat.com> <20200616033035.GB902@sol.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <56c2304c-73cc-8f48-d8d0-5dd6c39f33f3@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Waiman Long Cc: "Jason A . Donenfeld" , Michal Hocko , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Jarkko Sakkinen , David Sterba , David Howells , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, James Morris , Matthew Wilcox , ebiggers@kernel.org, linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org, David Rientjes , Dan Carpenter , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org, tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner , Joe Perches , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , netdev@vger.kernel.org, wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com, linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org Waiman Long wrote: > The kzfree() function is normally used to clear some sensitive > information, like encryption keys, in the buffer before freeing it back > to the pool. Memset() "memset()" is all lowercase. > is currently used for buffer clearing. However unlikely, there is still a > non-zero probability I'd say "a possibility". > that and I'd move "in [the] future" here. > the compiler may choose to optimize away the > memory clearing especially if LTO is being used in the future. To make sure > that this optimization will never happen "in these cases" > , memzero_explicit(), which is introduced in v3.18, is now used in "instead of"? > kzfree() to future-proof it. Davod