[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2017 17:23:44 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ker.com>,
"Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@...el.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Jordan Glover <Golden_Miller83@...tonmail.ch>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <wilal.deacon@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Chris Fries <cfries@...gle.com>, Dave Weinstein <olorin@...gle.com>,
Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>,
Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 0/2] printk: hash addresses printed with %p
On (11/01/17 10:35), Tobin C. Harding wrote:
[..]
> Yes. The question has been raised will we be here again in 6 years time
> trying to fix all the uses of %x. And there are already 29K uses of
> %[xX] in tree, which of these are leaking addresses? This is why Linus'
> has commented that really effort should be directed at finding the leaks
> as they happen (in procfs, sysfs, dmesg) instead of fixing this in
> the code.
got it. thanks.
> So far I haven't been able to come up with any meaningful way
> to do this on 32 bit machines. There is a patch adding a script to catch
> leaks on 64 bit machines in flight.
who is expected to run that script?
BTW, can BPF/eBPF printk addresses?
> This patch needs to be a small part of a continued effort to stop the
> leaks if we want to have any hope of stopping them.
>
> If you have any suggestions on dealing with %x please do say. We have
> code changes, compiler warnings, and checkpatch - none of which
> immediately seem great.
hm... just a huge pile of if's
if (is_vmalloc_addr(addr))
do_hashing(addr);
else if (__module_address(addr))
do_hashing(addr);
else if (is_kernel(addr) || is_kernel_inittext(addr))
...
but that's going to be really messy and "iffy".
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
