Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <c2c8adf48be7cb18bbdf0aef7d21e2defe3d2183.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: Add kvfree_sensitive() for freeing sensitive
 data objects
From:   Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To:     Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@kvack.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 06 Apr 2020 12:38:19 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20200406185827.22249-1-longman@redhat.com>
References: <20200406185827.22249-1-longman@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.1-2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2020-04-06 at 14:58 -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> For kvmalloc'ed data object that contains sensitive information like
> cryptographic key, we need to make sure that the buffer is always
> cleared before freeing it. Using memset() alone for buffer clearing may
> not provide certainty as the compiler may compile it away. To be sure,
> the special memzero_explicit() has to be used.

[] 
>  extern void kvfree(const void *addr);
> +extern void kvfree_sensitive(const void *addr, size_t len);

Question: why should this be const?

2.1.44 changed kfree(void *) to kfree(const void *) but
I didn't find a particular reason why.