On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:53:45PM +0100, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
On 4/14/20 2:27 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 01:50:38PM +0100, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
On 4/14/20 11:42 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
The aarch32_vdso_pages[] array never has entries allocated in the C_VVAR or C_VDSO slots, and as the array is zero initialized these contain NULL.
However in __aarch32_alloc_vdso_pages() when aarch32_alloc_kuser_vdso_page() fails we attempt to free the page whose struct page is at NULL, which is obviously nonsensical.
Could you please explain why do you think that free(NULL) is "nonsensical"?
Regardless of the below, can you please explain why it is sensical? I'm struggling to follow your argument here.
free(NULL) is a no-operation ("no action occurs") according to the C standard (ISO-IEC 9899 paragraph 7.20.3.2). Hence this should not cause any bug if the allocator is correctly implemented. From what I can see the implementation of the page allocator honors this assumption.
[...]
- page_to_virt(NULL) does not have a well-defined result, and page_to_virt() should only be called for a valid struct page pointer. The result of page_to_virt(NULL) may not be a pointer into the linear map as would be expected.
Do you know why this is the case? To be compliant with what the page allocator expects page_to_virt(NULL) should be equal to NULL.
Since __free_page(page) (note the two underscores and pointer type) does not accept a NULL argument, I don't see any reason for page_to_virt() to accept NULL as a valid argument.