On Jan 27, 2008 10:00 PM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
quoted text
> Hi Vegard,
>
> On Jan 27, 2008 10:07 PM, Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I am testing my kmemcheck patches, and it has come up with a couple of
> > uses of uninitialized memory in lib/idr.c. These are (the line numbers
> > may differ slightly):
>
> [snip]
>
> > @@ -39,12 +39,16 @@ static struct idr_layer *alloc_layer(struct idr *idp)
> >  {
> >         struct idr_layer *p;
> >         unsigned long flags;
> > +       int i;
> >
> >         spin_lock_irqsave(&idp->lock, flags);
> >         if ((p = idp->id_free)) {
> >                 idp->id_free = p->ary[0];
> >                 idp->id_free_cnt--;
> > -               p->ary[0] = NULL;
> > +               p->bitmap = 0;
> > +               for(i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(p->ary); ++i)
> > +                       p->ary[i] = NULL;
> > +               p->count = 0;
>
> But aren't these zeroed by idr_cache_ctor() already?

That would make sense. However...

idr_layer_cache is only used for allocations from idr_pre_get().
idr_pre_get() is only called from ida_pre_get().

If this analysis is correct, can this mean that the user has failed to
call ida_pre_get() before idr_get_new() was called?

Though in this case, idr_pre_get() actually *is* called first. Hmm...
I think there's a pretty big chance that kmemcheck is at fault :-(

Vegard
--
unsubscribe notice
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/