[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170907093631.GD533@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2017 18:36:31 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Helge Deller <deller@....de>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] Fix wrong %pF and %pS printk format specifier
usages
(Cc Tony, Fenghua, Benjamin, Paul, Michael)
a brief description:
original patch set:
lkml.kernel.org/r/1504729681-3504-1-git-send-email-deller@....de
start of this discussion:
lkml.kernel.org/r/20170907075653.GA533@...dpanzerIV.localdomain
basically we are looking at possibilities to make %pF/%pS differences
less disturbing. Helge has discovered a number of wrong usages in the
kernel and has fixed the currently existing call sites; the question
is what we can do to avoid this type of the patch sets in the future?
/* assuming that no one reads printk documentation */
Hopefully you guys can help.
On (09/07/17 11:12), Helge Deller wrote:
[..]
> > - ptr = dereference_function_descriptor(ptr);
> > + ptr = __dereference_function_descriptor(ptr);
>
> This is not needed.
> All affected arches (ia64, ppc64, parisc64) already call
> probe_kernel_address() inside their dereference_function_descriptor() function.
> So this patch just adds unnecessary overhead for all arches.
good, thanks. honestly, I obviously didn't check what each platform
does. guilty! sort of.
> > ... here is a question, does function descriptor belong to a special
> > section? can we check that supplied ptr belongs to a descriptor section
> > and avoid dereference_function_descriptor() if it doesn't? (just fall
> > through directly to symbol_string() in this case). is this possible?
>
> I think theoretically yes.
> On parisc ptr does *not* point to any code segment, and most likely it
> points to the .data segment. I don't know if that's the case for ia64 and
> ppc64 too.
> I can look into adding such check-code, but even then the warning will
> only show up if you run on ia64, ppc64 and parisc64.
ok. personally I think that we need to start doing "does ptr belong to
descriptor segment/section/etc" thing and skip
dereference_function_descriptor() when it doesn't. [well, where possible.
hopefully on every affected platform... if this problem actually bothers
any one]. that seems like the way to fix the root cause of the problem.
because it's you, Petr and may be 7 more guys who knows the difference
between %pF/%pS. no one else has any idea at all. and no one actually
reads the printk() documentation, let's be real :)
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists