[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101222171307.GA25611@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 18:13:07 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
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, davem@...emloft.net,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
eparis@...isplace.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] kptr_restrict for hiding kernel pointers
* Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com> 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?
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.
Ingo
--
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