On Tue, 31 Jul 2018, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > > Actually you should do this for SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU slabs. Usually they are with ->ctors but there > > are few without constructors. > > We can't reinitialize or even retag them. The latter will definitely cause false-positive use-after-free reports. > > Somewhat offtopic, but I can't understand how SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU > slabs can be useful without ctors or at least memset(0). Objects in > such slabs need to be type-stable, but I can't understand how it's > possible to establish type stability without a ctor... Are these bugs? > Or I am missing something subtle? What would be a canonical usage of > SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU slab without a ctor? True that sounds fishy. Would someone post a list of SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU slabs without ctors? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
