Re: [PATCH v5] kptr_restrict for hiding kernel pointers

From: Dan Rosenberg
Date: Wed Dec 22 2010 - 12:18:09 EST


On Wed, 2010-12-22 at 18:13 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > + case 'K':
> > + /*
> > + * %pK cannot be used in IRQ context because its test
> > + * for CAP_SYSLOG would be meaningless.
> > + */
> > + if (in_irq() || in_serving_softirq() || in_nmi())
> > + WARN_ONCE(1, "%%pK used in interrupt context.\n");
>
> Hm, that bit looks possibly broken - some useful warning in irq context could print
> a pointer into the syslog and this would generate a second warning? That probably
> would crash as it recurses back into the printk code?
>

The double "%%" acts as an escape and simply prints "%" rather than
treating it as a format specifier.

> Instead a warning could be inserted into the generated output instead, for example
> 'pK-error' (carefully staying within pointer length limits).
>
> Also, it would be nice to see a couple of actual %pK usage sites submitted as well -
> instead of this pure infrastructure patch.
>

I did this separately so that any arguments about individual usage
didn't sink the whole ship. Don't worry, you'll get your usage sites
very soon. :)

-Dan

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/