Re: [PATCH] x86: Fix memory leak of init_vdso_vars()
From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Thu Jul 21 2011 - 15:44:31 EST
* Andrew Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > * Andrew Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:33:14AM -0400, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >> >> From: Zhitong Wang <wzt.wzt@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >>
> >> >> If init_vdso_vars ran out of memory (not very likely), then it would
> >> >> leak a few pages as well.
> >> >>
> >> >> Also rename init_vdso_vars to just init_vdso, since initializing
> >> >> vvars is just about the only thing this function doesn't do.
> >> >
> >> > Just add a GFP_PANIC, there's no way to recover from this.
> >> > Your system will not work without a vdso.
> >> Ingo objected to this before, although I'm not convinved. Calling
> >> init_vdso_vars more than once will cause major problems (like
> >> double-patching of alternatives). If there's too little memory for
> >> it to work, then presumably there's also too little memory to start
> >> init.
> >> (Also, I bet that no one ever audited whether the ELF loader works
> >> right if the vDSO failed to load.)
> >> Ingo?
> > This assumes that the system actually needs an ELF loader - if a
> > static binary is booted via a init= boot parameter it might not be
> > needed.
> I actually meant the kernel's loaded. But I just looked and it appears correct.
> But I think this whole thing is silly, because I can't see any good
> reason that the vdso needs to allocate memory in the first place.
> I'll send a patch.
that's the perfect solution indeed :)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/