|
|
Message-ID: <201906270926.02AAEE93@keescook>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:29:11 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
Cc: Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Sandeep Patil <sspatil@...roid.com>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/2] mm: security: introduce init_on_alloc=1 and
init_on_free=1 boot options
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 09:25:11AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-06-27 at 15:03 +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> > +static int __init early_init_on_alloc(char *buf)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > + bool bool_result;
> > +
> > + if (!buf)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + ret = kstrtobool(buf, &bool_result);
> > + if (bool_result && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PAGE_POISONING))
> > + pr_warn("mem auto-init: CONFIG_PAGE_POISONING is on, will
> > take precedence over init_on_alloc\n");
>
> I don't like the warning here. It makes people think it is bug that need to be
> fixed, but actually it is just information. People could enable both in a debug
> kernel.
How would you suggest it be adjusted? Should it be silent, or be
switched to pr_info()?
Also, doesn't this need to check "want_page_poisoning", not just
CONFIG_PAGE_POISONING? Perhaps just leave the warning out entirely?
--
Kees Cook
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.