linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] do not call trace

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 linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 24 Apr 2018 20:39:27 +0000
From:   Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, Wei Wang <wei.vince.wang@...il.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Crt Mori <cmo@...exis.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] do not call trace_printk on non-debug build

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018, 12:26 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Apr 2018 19:20:03 +0000
> Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com> wrote:

> > checkpatch.pl sounds good. One thing to add is we have many off tree
> > patches with abuse trace_printk. Also as you mentioned, given this is
> > really not for use in production and we have been cleaning this our on
our
> > side for years, could we consider to enforce this in kernel?

> That nasty warning was suppose to be the enforcement. I would expect
> nobody would ship a kernel where it produced such a message on boot (or
> loading of a module). If they don't notice, then they are not testing
> their code.

> A lot of kernel developers use trace_printk() and I want to make it as
> easy to use as possible. I don't want to add a config to enable it,
> because that would be something that could be rather annoying.

The config is not something new and it is controlling pr_debug and
pr_devel, so might not be too annoying, IMHO. But I agree this is not a
problem from us but from abusers.

Thanks!
-Wei

> Let's add it to checkpatch and see if that can draining the swamp of
> abusers.

> -- Steve