linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Remove support for deprecated %pf and %pF in vsprintf

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]

Message-ID: <20190325151259.2w22y4ijqilrbaxj@kekkonen.localdomain>
Date:   Mon, 25 Mar 2019 17:13:00 +0200
From:   Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux MMC List <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        linux-um@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-pci <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        sparclinux <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
        ceph-devel <ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Lars Ellenberg <drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Remove support for deprecated %pf and %pF in vsprintf

Hi Andy,

On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 11:19:32PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 11:10:08PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 07:05:50PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 03:53:50PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Porting a patch
> > > > forward should have no issues either as checkpatch.pl has been complaining
> > > > of the use of %pf and %pF for a while now.
> > > 
> > > And that's exactly the reason why I think instead of removing warning on
> > > checkpatch, it makes sense to convert to an error for a while. People are
> > > tending read documentation on internet and thus might have outdated one. And
> > > yes, the compiler doesn't tell a thing about it.
> > > 
> > > P.S. Though, if majority of people will tell that I'm wrong, then it's okay to
> > > remove.
> > 
> > I wonder if you wrote this before seeing my other patchset.
> 
> Yes, I wrote it before seeing another series.
> 
> > What I think could be done is to warn of plain %pf (without following "w")
> > in checkpatch.pl, and %pf that is not followed by "w" in the kernel.
> > Although we didn't have such checks to begin with. The case is still a
> > little bit different as %pf used to be a valid conversion specifier whereas
> > %pO likely has never existed.
> > 
> > So, how about adding such checks in the other set? I can retain %p[fF] check
> > here, too, if you like.
> 
> Consistency tells me that the warning->error transformation in checkpatch.pl
> belongs this series.

All other invalid pointer conversion specifiers currently result into a
warning only. I see that as an orthogonal change to this set. I found
another issue in checkpatch.pl that may require some discussion; would you
be ok with addressing this in another set?

-- 
Regards,

Sakari Ailus
sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com