From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Mimi Zohar) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 16:30:30 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] integrity: add error handling for kmem_cache_create In-Reply-To: <1528777625-40502-1-git-send-email-jiazhouyang09@gmail.com> References: <1528777625-40502-1-git-send-email-jiazhouyang09@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1528921830.3282.7.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2018-06-12 at 12:27 +0800, Zhouyang Jia wrote: > When kmem_cache_create fails, the lack of error-handling code may > cause unexpected results. > > This patch adds error-handling code after calling kmem_cache_create. The slab is being create during __init. ?Under what circumstances do you expect the allocation to fail? ?Have you tested what happens if it fails with/without at least an IMA measurement policy? Mimi ?? > > Signed-off-by: Zhouyang Jia > --- > security/integrity/iint.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/security/integrity/iint.c b/security/integrity/iint.c > index 149faa8..c074fd8 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/iint.c > +++ b/security/integrity/iint.c > @@ -172,6 +172,9 @@ static int __init integrity_iintcache_init(void) > iint_cache = > kmem_cache_create("iint_cache", sizeof(struct integrity_iint_cache), > 0, SLAB_PANIC, init_once); > + if (!iint_cache) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > return 0; > } > security_initcall(integrity_iintcache_init); -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html