[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50259.1292883991@localhost>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 17:26:31 -0500
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, jmorris@...ei.org,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, tgraf@...radead.org, eugeneteo@...nel.org,
kees.cook@...onical.com, mingo@...e.hu, davem@...emloft.net,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] kptr_restrict for hiding kernel pointers
On Sat, 18 Dec 2010 12:20:34 EST, Dan Rosenberg said:
> @@ -1035,6 +1038,26 @@ char *pointer(const char *fmt, char *buf, char *end, void *ptr,
> return buf + vsnprintf(buf, end - buf,
> ((struct va_format *)ptr)->fmt,
> *(((struct va_format *)ptr)->va));
> + case 'K':
> + /*
> + * %pK cannot be used in IRQ context because it tests
> + * CAP_SYSLOG.
> + */
> + if (in_irq() || in_serving_softirq() || in_nmi())
> + WARN_ONCE(1, "%%pK used in interrupt context.\n");
Should this then continue on and test CAP_SYSLOG anyhow, or should it
return a "" or or "<invalid>" or something?
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists