* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
@ 2020-06-04 15:20 Markus Elfring
2020-06-04 15:56 ` Julia Lawall
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Markus Elfring @ 2020-06-04 15:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Denis Efremov, Gilles Muller, Julia Lawall, Masahiro Yamada,
Michal Marek, Nicolas Palix, Coccinelle
Cc: kernel-janitors, linux-kernel
> Check for memset() with 0 followed by kfree().
I suggest to simplify the SmPL code a bit like the following.
> +virtual context
> +virtual org
> +virtual report
> +virtual patch
+virtual context, org, report, patch
…
> +@@
> +
> +(
> +* memset(E, 0, ...);
> +|
> +* memset(E, '\0', ...);
> +)
> +* kfree(E)@p;
+@@
+*memset(E, 0, ...);
+*kfree(E)@p;
How does the SmPL asterisk functionality fit to the operation
modes “org” and “report”?
> +@@
> +
> +(
> +- memset(E, 0, ...);
> +|
> +- memset(E, '\0', ...);
> +)
> +- kfree(E);
> ++ kzfree(E);
+@@
+-memset(E, 0, ...);
+-kfree
++kzfree
+ (E);
I got the impression that the specification of a SmPL disjunction
could be omitted because of the technical detail that the isomorphism
“zero_multiple_format” should handle such an use case already.
Would you like to tolerate any extra source code between these function calls?
Regards,
Markus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-04 15:20 [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script Markus Elfring
@ 2020-06-04 15:56 ` Julia Lawall
2020-06-04 16:08 ` Markus Elfring
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2020-06-04 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Markus Elfring
Cc: Denis Efremov, Gilles Muller, Masahiro Yamada, Michal Marek,
Nicolas Palix, Coccinelle, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1183 bytes --]
On Thu, 4 Jun 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Check for memset() with 0 followed by kfree().
>
> I suggest to simplify the SmPL code a bit like the following.
>
>
> > +virtual context
> > +virtual org
> > +virtual report
> > +virtual patch
>
> +virtual context, org, report, patch
This is pointless.
>
>
> …
> > +@@
> > +
> > +(
> > +* memset(E, 0, ...);
> > +|
> > +* memset(E, '\0', ...);
> > +)
> > +* kfree(E)@p;
>
> +@@
> +*memset(E, 0, ...);
> +*kfree(E)@p;
>
>
> How does the SmPL asterisk functionality fit to the operation
> modes “org” and “report”?
make coccicheck uses the option --no-show-diff for the org and report
modes.
>
> > +@@
> > +
> > +(
> > +- memset(E, 0, ...);
> > +|
> > +- memset(E, '\0', ...);
> > +)
> > +- kfree(E);
> > ++ kzfree(E);
>
> +@@
> +-memset(E, 0, ...);
> +-kfree
> ++kzfree
> + (E);
>
> I got the impression that the specification of a SmPL disjunction
> could be omitted because of the technical detail that the isomorphism
> “zero_multiple_format” should handle such an use case already.
>
> Would you like to tolerate any extra source code between these function calls?
I already addressed these issues.
julia
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-04 15:56 ` Julia Lawall
@ 2020-06-04 16:08 ` Markus Elfring
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Markus Elfring @ 2020-06-04 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julia Lawall, Denis Efremov, Coccinelle
Cc: Gilles Muller, Masahiro Yamada, Michal Marek, Nicolas Palix,
kernel-janitors, linux-kernel
>>> +virtual context
>>> +virtual org
>>> +virtual report
>>> +virtual patch
>>
>> +virtual context, org, report, patch
>
> This is pointless.
I find the proposed SmPL code variant more succinct.
>> How does the SmPL asterisk functionality fit to the operation
>> modes “org” and “report”?
>
> make coccicheck uses the option --no-show-diff for the org and report modes.
Can it be nicer to avoid the usage of specific functionality
in the SmPL script directly?
Should the corresponding SmPL rule dependencies become clearer?
Regards,
Markus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
@ 2020-06-04 14:08 Denis Efremov
2020-06-04 14:15 ` Julia Lawall
2020-06-04 16:27 ` Joe Perches
0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Denis Efremov @ 2020-06-04 14:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julia Lawall; +Cc: Denis Efremov, cocci, linux-kernel
Check for memset() with 0 followed by kfree().
Signed-off-by: Denis Efremov <efremov@linux.com>
---
Patches:
1. kzfree in drivers/w1 https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/4/438
2. kzfree in drivers/iommu/ https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/4/421
3. kzfree in drivers/scsi/ https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/4/442
scripts/coccinelle/api/kzfree.cocci | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 53 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/kzfree.cocci
diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/api/kzfree.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/api/kzfree.cocci
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..c6b8f7676af4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/kzfree.cocci
@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
+///
+/// Use kzfree rather than memset with 0 followed by kfree
+///
+// Confidence: High
+// Copyright: (C) 2020 Denis Efremov ISPRAS
+// Options: --no-includes --include-headers
+//
+// Keywords: kzfree
+//
+
+virtual context
+virtual org
+virtual report
+virtual patch
+
+// Ignore kzfree definition
+// Ignore kasan test
+@r depends on !patch && !(file in "lib/test_kasan.c") && !(file in "mm/slab_common.c")@
+expression E;
+position p;
+@@
+
+(
+* memset(E, 0, ...);
+|
+* memset(E, '\0', ...);
+)
+* kfree(E)@p;
+
+@r1 depends on patch && !(file in "lib/test_kasan.c") && !(file in "mm/slab_common.c")@
+expression E;
+@@
+
+(
+- memset(E, 0, ...);
+|
+- memset(E, '\0', ...);
+)
+- kfree(E);
++ kzfree(E);
+
+@script:python depends on report@
+p << r.p;
+@@
+
+coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], "WARNING opportunity for kzfree")
+
+@script:python depends on org@
+p << r.p;
+@@
+
+coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], "WARNING opportunity for kzfree")
--
2.26.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-04 14:08 [PATCH] " Denis Efremov
@ 2020-06-04 14:15 ` Julia Lawall
2020-06-04 15:39 ` Denis Efremov
2020-06-04 16:27 ` Joe Perches
1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2020-06-04 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Denis Efremov; +Cc: cocci, linux-kernel
On Thu, 4 Jun 2020, Denis Efremov wrote:
> Check for memset() with 0 followed by kfree().
>
> Signed-off-by: Denis Efremov <efremov@linux.com>
> ---
> Patches:
> 1. kzfree in drivers/w1 https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/4/438
> 2. kzfree in drivers/iommu/ https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/4/421
> 3. kzfree in drivers/scsi/ https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/4/442
>
> scripts/coccinelle/api/kzfree.cocci | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/kzfree.cocci
>
> diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/api/kzfree.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/api/kzfree.cocci
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..c6b8f7676af4
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/kzfree.cocci
> @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> +///
> +/// Use kzfree rather than memset with 0 followed by kfree
> +///
> +// Confidence: High
> +// Copyright: (C) 2020 Denis Efremov ISPRAS
> +// Options: --no-includes --include-headers
> +//
> +// Keywords: kzfree
> +//
> +
> +virtual context
> +virtual org
> +virtual report
> +virtual patch
> +
> +// Ignore kzfree definition
> +// Ignore kasan test
> +@r depends on !patch && !(file in "lib/test_kasan.c") && !(file in "mm/slab_common.c")@
> +expression E;
> +position p;
> +@@
> +
> +(
> +* memset(E, 0, ...);
> +|
> +* memset(E, '\0', ...);
> +)
You shouldn't need both cases. 0 should be enough.
Did you try ... here but find that some subexpressions of E could be
modified in between?
julia
> +* kfree(E)@p;
> +
> +@r1 depends on patch && !(file in "lib/test_kasan.c") && !(file in "mm/slab_common.c")@
> +expression E;
> +@@
> +
> +(
> +- memset(E, 0, ...);
> +|
> +- memset(E, '\0', ...);
> +)
> +- kfree(E);
> ++ kzfree(E);
> +
> +@script:python depends on report@
> +p << r.p;
> +@@
> +
> +coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], "WARNING opportunity for kzfree")
> +
> +@script:python depends on org@
> +p << r.p;
> +@@
> +
> +coccilib.org.print_todo(p[0], "WARNING opportunity for kzfree")
> --
> 2.26.2
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-04 14:15 ` Julia Lawall
@ 2020-06-04 15:39 ` Denis Efremov
2020-06-04 15:51 ` Julia Lawall
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Denis Efremov @ 2020-06-04 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julia Lawall; +Cc: cocci, linux-kernel
On 6/4/20 5:15 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> Did you try ... here but find that some subexpressions of E could be
> modified in between?
Yes, I tried to use "... when != E = E1 when != &E" and results were bad.
Now, I've tried forall and when strict. Here are examples:
// forall added
// Works well, suitable for v2. One additional catch in w1 driver.
@r depends on !patch && !(file in "lib/test_kasan.c") && !(file in "mm/slab_common.c") forall@
expression *E; // pointer. Results are equal as if we use E.
position p;
@@
* memset(E, 0, ...);
... when != E // Is it enough to match &E, E = E1?
* kfree(E)@p;
//no forall, when strict
//results are bad, too many false positives
@r depends on !patch && !(file in "lib/test_kasan.c") && !(file in "mm/slab_common.c")@
expression *E;
position p;
@@
* memset(E, 0, ...);
... when != E // E is not enough here
when strict
* kfree(E)@p;
I guess that the difference is that "forall" requires that whole pattern should occur on
every path, "when strict" states that kfree should be called on every path after memset.
This results in missed uses of E in loops and under conditions. How can I state in this
case that E should not occur at all (in all paths) in between memset, kfree even as a
subexpression?
// Doesn't work well
... when != E
when != if (...) { ... E ... }
when != for(...;...;...) { ... E ... }
Regards,
Denis
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-04 15:39 ` Denis Efremov
@ 2020-06-04 15:51 ` Julia Lawall
2020-06-04 17:22 ` Denis Efremov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2020-06-04 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Denis Efremov; +Cc: Julia Lawall, cocci, linux-kernel
On Thu, 4 Jun 2020, Denis Efremov wrote:
>
>
> On 6/4/20 5:15 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > Did you try ... here but find that some subexpressions of E could be
> > modified in between?
>
> Yes, I tried to use "... when != E = E1 when != &E" and results were bad.
> Now, I've tried forall and when strict. Here are examples:
>
> // forall added
> // Works well, suitable for v2. One additional catch in w1 driver.
> @r depends on !patch && !(file in "lib/test_kasan.c") && !(file in "mm/slab_common.c") forall@
> expression *E; // pointer. Results are equal as if we use E.
> position p;
> @@
>
> * memset(E, 0, ...);
> ... when != E // Is it enough to match &E, E = E1?
Yes.
> * kfree(E)@p;
>
> //no forall, when strict
> //results are bad, too many false positives
> @r depends on !patch && !(file in "lib/test_kasan.c") && !(file in "mm/slab_common.c")@
> expression *E;
> position p;
> @@
>
> * memset(E, 0, ...);
> ... when != E // E is not enough here
> when strict
OK, it's reassonable.
> * kfree(E)@p;
>
> I guess that the difference is that "forall" requires that whole pattern should occur on
> every path, "when strict" states that kfree should be called on every path after memset.
> This results in missed uses of E in loops and under conditions. How can I state in this
> case that E should not occur at all (in all paths) in between memset, kfree even as a
> subexpression?
>
> // Doesn't work well
> ... when != E
> when != if (...) { ... E ... }
> when != for(...;...;...) { ... E ... }
Could you send an example of some C code on which the result is not
suitable?
julia
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-04 15:51 ` Julia Lawall
@ 2020-06-04 17:22 ` Denis Efremov
2020-06-04 17:28 ` Julia Lawall
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Denis Efremov @ 2020-06-04 17:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julia Lawall; +Cc: cocci, linux-kernel
> Could you send an example of some C code on which the result is not
> suitable?
I've updated the pattern to handle false positives:
@ifok@
position p;
expression *E;
@@
(
if (...) {
...
memset(E, 0, ...)@p;
...
}
|
if (...) {
...
} else {
...
memset(E, 0, ...)@p;
...
}
)
// Ignore kzfree definition
// Ignore kasan test
@r depends on !patch && !(file in "lib/test_kasan.c") && !(file in "mm/slab_common.c")@
expression *E;
position p != ifok.p;
@@
* memset(E, 0, ...)@p;
... when != E
when != if (...) { ... E ... }
when != for (...;...;...) { ... E ... }
when != while (...) { ... E ... }
when strict
* kfree(E);
Example of false positives:
void test_memset_under_if(void)
{
char *p = malloc(10, GFP_KERNEL);
if (p % 5) {
p[5] = 1;
} else {
memset(p, 0, 10);
}
kfree(p);
}
void test_memset_under_if(void)
{
int i;
char *p = malloc(10, GFP_KERNEL);
for (i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {
memset(p, 0, 10);
}
kfree(p);
}
void test_E_in_if(void)
{
char *p = malloc(10, GFP_KERNEL);
memset(p, 0, 10); // when != E is not enough
if (10) { // when != if (...) { ... E ... } is required
p[5] = 1;
}
kfree(p);
}
void test_E_in_for(void)
{
char *p = malloc(10, GFP_KERNEL);
memset(p, 0, 10);
for(;;) {
p[5] = 1;
}
kfree(p);
}
void test_E_in_while(void)
{
char *p = malloc(10, GFP_KERNEL);
memset(p, 0, 10);
while(1) {
p[6] = 2;
}
kfree(p);
}
void test_E_in_struct(void)
{
struct t { int a[3]; };
struct t *p = malloc(10 * sizeof(struct(struct t)), GFP_KERNEL);
memset(p, 0, 10);
for(;;) {
if (1) {
p->a[2] = 1; // I give up on this
p->a[0] = 10;
}
}
kfree(p);
}
After all it seems reasonable to me to add forall and memset_explicit rather
than handle all these false positives. Something like this for v2?
@r depends on !patch && !(file in "lib/test_kasan.c") && !(file in "mm/slab_common.c") forall@
expression *E;
position p;
@@
* \(memset\|memset_explicit\)(E, 0, ...);
... when != E
* kfree(E)@p;
Do I need to add "when strict" with forall or it's already enabled in this case?
Do I need to enable forall for pathing "-/+"?
Thanks,
Denis
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-04 17:22 ` Denis Efremov
@ 2020-06-04 17:28 ` Julia Lawall
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2020-06-04 17:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Denis Efremov; +Cc: cocci, linux-kernel
> After all it seems reasonable to me to add forall and memset_explicit rather
> than handle all these false positives. Something like this for v2?
>
> @r depends on !patch && !(file in "lib/test_kasan.c") && !(file in "mm/slab_common.c") forall@
> expression *E;
> position p;
> @@
>
> * \(memset\|memset_explicit\)(E, 0, ...);
> ... when != E
> * kfree(E)@p;
>
> Do I need to add "when strict" with forall or it's already enabled in this case?
> Do I need to enable forall for pathing "-/+"?
forall seems entirely reasonable. You don't need it in the -/+ case. I
would put when strict in both cases.
julia
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-04 14:08 [PATCH] " Denis Efremov
2020-06-04 14:15 ` Julia Lawall
@ 2020-06-04 16:27 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-04 17:30 ` Denis Efremov
2020-06-14 19:42 ` Denis Efremov
1 sibling, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Joe Perches @ 2020-06-04 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Denis Efremov, Julia Lawall; +Cc: cocci, linux-kernel
On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 17:08 +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
> Check for memset() with 0 followed by kfree().
Perhaps those uses should be memzero_explicit or kvfree_sensitive.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-04 16:27 ` Joe Perches
@ 2020-06-04 17:30 ` Denis Efremov
2020-06-04 17:36 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-14 19:42 ` Denis Efremov
1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Denis Efremov @ 2020-06-04 17:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joe Perches, Julia Lawall; +Cc: cocci, linux-kernel
On 6/4/20 7:27 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 17:08 +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
>> Check for memset() with 0 followed by kfree().
>
> Perhaps those uses should be memzero_explicit or kvfree_sensitive.
Thanks, I will add memzero_explicit(). However, I can't find kvfree_sensitive().
Is it in next already?
Thanks,
Denis
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-04 17:30 ` Denis Efremov
@ 2020-06-04 17:36 ` Joe Perches
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Joe Perches @ 2020-06-04 17:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: efremov, Julia Lawall; +Cc: cocci, linux-kernel
On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 20:30 +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
>
> On 6/4/20 7:27 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 17:08 +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
> > > Check for memset() with 0 followed by kfree().
> >
> > Perhaps those uses should be memzero_explicit or kvfree_sensitive.
>
> Thanks, I will add memzero_explicit(). However, I can't find kvfree_sensitive().
> Is it in next already?
Yes
$ git grep kvfree_sensitive
include/linux/mm.h:extern void kvfree_sensitive(const void *addr, size_t len);
mm/util.c: * kvfree_sensitive - Free a data object containing sensitive information.
mm/util.c:void kvfree_sensitive(const void *addr, size_t len)
mm/util.c:EXPORT_SYMBOL(kvfree_sensitive);
security/keys/keyctl.c: kvfree_sensitive(payload, plen);
security/keys/keyctl.c: kvfree_sensitive(payload, plen);
security/keys/keyctl.c: kvfree_sensitive(key_data, key_data_len);
security/keys/keyctl.c: kvfree_sensitive(key_data, key_data_len);
security/keys/keyctl.c: kvfree_sensitive(payload, plen);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-04 16:27 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-04 17:30 ` Denis Efremov
@ 2020-06-14 19:42 ` Denis Efremov
2020-06-14 20:01 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-15 12:03 ` Dan Carpenter
1 sibling, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Denis Efremov @ 2020-06-14 19:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joe Perches, Julia Lawall, Dan Carpenter; +Cc: cocci, linux-kernel
On 6/4/20 7:27 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 17:08 +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
>> Check for memset() with 0 followed by kfree().
>
> Perhaps those uses should be memzero_explicit or kvfree_sensitive.
>
Is it safe to suggest to use kzfree instead of memzero_explicit && kfree?
Or it would be better to use kvfree_sensitive in this case.
kzfree uses memset(0) with no barrier_data.
For example:
diff -u -p a/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_hash.c b/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_hash.c
--- a/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_hash.c
+++ b/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_hash.c
@@ -1081,8 +1081,7 @@ static int safexcel_hmac_init_pad(struct
}
/* Avoid leaking */
- memzero_explicit(keydup, keylen);
- kfree(keydup);
+ kzfree(keydup);
if (ret)
return ret;
Thanks,
Denis
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-14 19:42 ` Denis Efremov
@ 2020-06-14 20:01 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-15 12:03 ` Dan Carpenter
1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Joe Perches @ 2020-06-14 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: efremov, Julia Lawall, Dan Carpenter; +Cc: cocci, linux-kernel
On Sun, 2020-06-14 at 22:42 +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
> On 6/4/20 7:27 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 17:08 +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
> > > Check for memset() with 0 followed by kfree().
> >
> > Perhaps those uses should be memzero_explicit or kvfree_sensitive.
> >
> Is it safe to suggest to use kzfree instead of memzero_explicit && kfree?
> Or it would be better to use kvfree_sensitive in this case.
> kzfree uses memset(0) with no barrier_data.
>
> For example:
> diff -u -p a/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_hash.c b/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel_hash.c
[]
> @@ -1081,8 +1081,7 @@ static int safexcel_hmac_init_pad(struct
> }
>
> /* Avoid leaking */
> - memzero_explicit(keydup, keylen);
> - kfree(keydup);
> + kzfree(keydup);
It would be better to use kvfree_sensitive()
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-14 19:42 ` Denis Efremov
2020-06-14 20:01 ` Joe Perches
@ 2020-06-15 12:03 ` Dan Carpenter
2020-06-15 13:51 ` Denis Efremov
1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2020-06-15 12:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Denis Efremov; +Cc: Joe Perches, Julia Lawall, cocci, linux-kernel
On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 10:42:54PM +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
> On 6/4/20 7:27 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 17:08 +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
> >> Check for memset() with 0 followed by kfree().
> >
> > Perhaps those uses should be memzero_explicit or kvfree_sensitive.
> >
>
> Is it safe to suggest to use kzfree instead of memzero_explicit && kfree?
> Or it would be better to use kvfree_sensitive in this case.
>
> kzfree uses memset(0) with no barrier_data.
Yeah. That seems buggy. It should have a barrier. Also I thought I
saw somewhere that Linus doesn't like the name and so that's why we have
the _sensitive() name?
regards,
dan carpenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script
2020-06-15 12:03 ` Dan Carpenter
@ 2020-06-15 13:51 ` Denis Efremov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Denis Efremov @ 2020-06-15 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dan Carpenter; +Cc: Joe Perches, Julia Lawall, cocci, linux-kernel
On 6/15/20 3:03 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 10:42:54PM +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
>> On 6/4/20 7:27 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 17:08 +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
>>>> Check for memset() with 0 followed by kfree().
>>>
>>> Perhaps those uses should be memzero_explicit or kvfree_sensitive.
>>>
>>
>> Is it safe to suggest to use kzfree instead of memzero_explicit && kfree?
>> Or it would be better to use kvfree_sensitive in this case.
>>
>> kzfree uses memset(0) with no barrier_data.
>
> Yeah. That seems buggy. It should have a barrier. Also I thought I
> saw somewhere that Linus doesn't like the name and so that's why we have
> the _sensitive() name?
>
Oh, there are already patches for renaming kzfree to kfree_sensitive.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/4/13/729
It seems they are not accepted despite multiple acks, through.
Thanks,
Denis
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-06-15 13:51 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-06-04 15:20 [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add kzfree script Markus Elfring
2020-06-04 15:56 ` Julia Lawall
2020-06-04 16:08 ` Markus Elfring
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-06-04 14:08 [PATCH] " Denis Efremov
2020-06-04 14:15 ` Julia Lawall
2020-06-04 15:39 ` Denis Efremov
2020-06-04 15:51 ` Julia Lawall
2020-06-04 17:22 ` Denis Efremov
2020-06-04 17:28 ` Julia Lawall
2020-06-04 16:27 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-04 17:30 ` Denis Efremov
2020-06-04 17:36 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-14 19:42 ` Denis Efremov
2020-06-14 20:01 ` Joe Perches
2020-06-15 12:03 ` Dan Carpenter
2020-06-15 13:51 ` Denis Efremov
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).