On Mon, 7 Feb 2011, tadeusz.struk@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: > Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 16:41:11 +0000 > Subject: RE: [PATCH] rfc4106, Intel, AES-NI: Don't leak memory in rfc4106_set_hash_subkey(). > > Hi Jesper, > Thanks, but I think there is still a problem here. You don't want to kfree req_data > when the kmalloc failed. I think it should look as follows. > Are you ok with this? > Fine by me. I was aware of the kfree(NULL) thing, but desided to leave it as is for two reasons - 1) kfree(NULL) is harmless and this is an error path, so the extra function call doesn't matter much. 2) I wanted to preserve deallocations in the reverse order of the allocations. But sure, moving that kfree is a tiny optimization of the error path, so I'm fine with it. -- Jesper Juhl <jj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> http://www.chaosbits.net/ Plain text mails only, please. Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
