lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2014 13:45:14 -0700 From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH] vsprintf: Remove SPECIAL from pointer types Because gcc issues a complaint about any pointer format with %#p, remove the use of SPECIAL to prefix 0x to various pointer types. There are no uses in the kernel tree of %#p. This removes the capability added by commit 725fe002d315 ("vsprintf: correctly handle width when '#' flag used in %#p format"). There are some incidental message logging output changes of %pa uses with this change. None are in seq output so there are no api changes. Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> --- Fine by me, here... On Sat, 2014-07-05 at 21:25 +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Sat, 5 Jul 2014, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > I don't think %#p is valid so it > > > > shouldn't have been set by #. > > > > > > Huh? As recently as last Wednesday you pointed me at the specific commit > > > from Grant that made it valid (GCC format complaints aside). > > > > Those gcc complaints are precisely the thing > > that makes it invalid. > > So enforce that in code then, clear the SPECIAL flag where appropriate > and do not try to handle it in one place while leaving other ones to > behave randomly (i.e. a supposedly fixed field width varies depending on > the two uppermost digits). Please note that it's only your proposed > change that introduces that randomness, right now code does what's > supposed and documented to, except a bit inconsistently. > > > I believe you're tilting at windmills. > > > > Hey, it works sometimes. Knock yourself out. > > I pointed out an inconsistency with the intent to propose a fix once a > consensus have been reached, one way or another. And I think shifting the > inconsistency to a different place, which is what your proposal does, > isn't really a complete solution, although I do recognise the improvement. lib/vsprintf.c | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c index 6fe2c84..1cad65b 100644 --- a/lib/vsprintf.c +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c @@ -632,7 +632,7 @@ char *symbol_string(char *buf, char *end, void *ptr, return string(buf, end, sym, spec); #else spec.field_width = 2 * sizeof(void *); - spec.flags |= SPECIAL | SMALL | ZEROPAD; + spec.flags |= SMALL | ZEROPAD; spec.base = 16; return number(buf, end, value, spec); @@ -1165,18 +1165,18 @@ char *address_val(char *buf, char *end, const void *addr, { unsigned long long num; - spec.flags |= SPECIAL | SMALL | ZEROPAD; + spec.flags |= SMALL | ZEROPAD; spec.base = 16; switch (fmt[1]) { case 'd': num = *(const dma_addr_t *)addr; - spec.field_width = sizeof(dma_addr_t) * 2 + 2; + spec.field_width = sizeof(dma_addr_t) * 2; break; case 'p': default: num = *(const phys_addr_t *)addr; - spec.field_width = sizeof(phys_addr_t) * 2 + 2; + spec.field_width = sizeof(phys_addr_t) * 2; break; } @@ -1259,7 +1259,7 @@ static noinline_for_stack char *pointer(const char *fmt, char *buf, char *end, void *ptr, struct printf_spec spec) { - int default_width = 2 * sizeof(void *) + (spec.flags & SPECIAL ? 2 : 0); + int default_width = 2 * sizeof(void *); if (!ptr && *fmt != 'K') { /* -- 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