like the call was added fairly recently by:
> >
> > commit 05c58752f9dce11e396676eb731a620541590ed0
> > Author: CHANDAN VN
> > Date: Mon Apr 30 09:50:18 2018 +0530
> >
> > arm64: To remove initrd reserved area entry from memblock
> >
> > which c
>On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 02:01:34PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> On 6/1/2018 10:45 AM, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> > Fix memory leak in smack_inode_getsecctx
>> >
>> > The implementation of smack_inode_getsecctx() made
>> > incorrect assumptions about how Smack presents a security
>> >
>On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 02:01:34PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> On 6/1/2018 10:45 AM, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> > Fix memory leak in smack_inode_getsecctx
>> >
>> > The implementation of smack_inode_getsecctx() made
>> > incorrect assumptions about how Smack presents a security
>> >
>> I agree that the fix can be done simply by using "false" for
>> smack_inode_getsecurity(), but what happens with kernfs_node_setsecdata()
>> and smack_inode_notifysecctx(). kernfs_node_setsecdata() is probably
>>ignorable
>> but smack_inode_notifysecctx() is sending the "ctx" to
>> I agree that the fix can be done simply by using "false" for
>> smack_inode_getsecurity(), but what happens with kernfs_node_setsecdata()
>> and smack_inode_notifysecctx(). kernfs_node_setsecdata() is probably
>>ignorable
>> but smack_inode_notifysecctx() is sending the "ctx" to
Hi
>On 5/31/2018 9:11 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 09:04:25AM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>>> On 5/31/2018 8:39 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
(cc'ing more security folks and copying whole body)
So, I'm sure the patch fixes the memory leak but API wise it looks
Hi
>On 5/31/2018 9:11 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 09:04:25AM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>>> On 5/31/2018 8:39 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
(cc'ing more security folks and copying whole body)
So, I'm sure the patch fixes the memory leak but API wise it looks
[] kernfs_security_xattr_set+0x74/0xe0
[] __vfs_setxattr+0x74/0x90
[] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x80/0x1ac
[] vfs_setxattr+0x84/0xac
[] setxattr+0x114/0x178
[] path_setxattr+0x74/0xb8
[] SyS_lsetxattr+0x10/0x1c
[] __sys_trace_return+0x0/0x4
Signed-off-by: sireesha.t
Sign
[] kernfs_security_xattr_set+0x74/0xe0
[] __vfs_setxattr+0x74/0x90
[] __vfs_setxattr_noperm+0x80/0x1ac
[] vfs_setxattr+0x84/0xac
[] setxattr+0x114/0x178
[] path_setxattr+0x74/0xb8
[] SyS_lsetxattr+0x10/0x1c
[] __sys_trace_return+0x0/0x4
Signed-off-by: sireesha.t
Sign
Please ignore this mail. I missed replying to the thread.
I have resubmitted over the proper thread.
On Mon, 30 Apr 2018, 09:44 CHANDAN VN, <chandan...@samsung.com> wrote:
>
> INITRD reserved area entry is not removed from memblock
> even though initrd reserved area is freed
Please ignore this mail. I missed replying to the thread.
I have resubmitted over the proper thread.
On Mon, 30 Apr 2018, 09:44 CHANDAN VN, wrote:
>
> INITRD reserved area entry is not removed from memblock
> even though initrd reserved area is freed. After freeing
> the memory it
keepinitrd is not enabled.
The patch only affects accounting and debugging. This does not
fix any memory leak.
Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN <chandan...@samsung.com>
---
arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/
keepinitrd is not enabled.
The patch only affects accounting and debugging. This does not
fix any memory leak.
Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN
---
arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
index 9f3c47a..1b18b47
keepinitrd is not enabled.
The patch only affects accounting and debugging. This does not
fix any memory leak.
Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN <chandan...@samsung.com>
---
arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/
keepinitrd is not enabled.
The patch only affects accounting and debugging. This does not
fix any memory leak.
Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN
---
arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
index 9f3c47a..1b18b47
Hi,
May I know when this patch would be taken for merging?
On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Chandan Vn <vn.chan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 9:47 PM, Laura Abbott <labb...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Does this have an impact on anything besides accounting
&g
Hi,
May I know when this patch would be taken for merging?
On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Chandan Vn wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 9:47 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
>> Does this have an impact on anything besides accounting
>> in memblock?
>
> Yes, the impact is only on ac
find any such problem
with ARM32 ARCHITECTURE.
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 9:47 PM, Laura Abbott <labb...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/05/2018 09:53 PM, CHANDAN VN wrote:
>>
>> INITRD reserved area entry is not removed from memblock
>> even though initrd reserved area is free
RM32 ARCHITECTURE.
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 9:47 PM, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 04/05/2018 09:53 PM, CHANDAN VN wrote:
>>
>> INITRD reserved area entry is not removed from memblock
>> even though initrd reserved area is freed. After freeing
>> the memory it is released from
keepinitrd is not enabled.
Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN <chandan...@samsung.com>
---
arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
index 9f3c47a..1b18b47 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/
keepinitrd is not enabled.
Signed-off-by: CHANDAN VN
---
arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
index 9f3c47a..1b18b47 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
@@ -646,8 +646,10
21 matches
Mail list logo
