[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908062321420.2840@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 23:22:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] tracing/filters: Support filtering for char *
strings
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Li Zefan wrote:
> >
> > What protection is this giving us?
> >
>
> __field(char *) suggests it should be treated as plain pointer,
> while __field_ext(char *, FILTER_PTR_STR) suggests he's aware it's
> safe to dereference the pointer, for example the case in Frederic's
> blk events.
>
> In Frederic's initial version, "char *" field will always be
> attached to ptr_str filter function. This is unsafe, because for
> other fields defined as "char *" but not safe to dereference,
> a user still can do this:
>
> # echo 'name == abc' > filter
>
> Then we'll deref a pointer that can point to unsafe data.
>
> In this patch, this won't happen, as long as the developer is
> aware that his use of __field_ext(char *) is right.
>
> Otherwise, he will just use normal __field(char *) and print
> the pointer itself in TP_printk().
Ah, so the answer I'm looking for is:
The filtering will not dereference "char *" unless the developer
explicitly sets FILTER_PTR_STR in __field_ext.
Is this above statement correct?
-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists