linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] ata: atp867x: Cleanup pointer value print

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <e9c13b1d-a4dd-9aea-e8b5-2165e727d660@omp.ru>
Date:   Tue, 12 Oct 2021 11:08:53 +0300
From:   Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@....ru>
To:     Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>,
        Guo Zhi <qtxuning1999@...u.edu.cn>
CC:     <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ata: atp867x: Cleanup pointer value print

On 12.10.2021 4:06, Damien Le Moal wrote:

>> Pointers should be printed with %p or %px rather than cast to
>> 'unsigned long' and printed with %lx
>> Change %lx to %p to print the secured pointer.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Guo Zhi <qtxuning1999@...u.edu.cn>
>> ---
>>   drivers/ata/pata_atp867x.c | 10 +++++-----
>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_atp867x.c b/drivers/ata/pata_atp867x.c
>> index 2bc5fc81efe3..c32b95f48e50 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ata/pata_atp867x.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_atp867x.c
>> @@ -447,11 +447,11 @@ static int atp867x_ata_pci_sff_init_host(struct ata_host *host)
>>   #ifdef	ATP867X_DEBUG
>>   		atp867x_check_ports(ap, i);
>>   #endif
>> -		ata_port_desc(ap, "cmd 0x%lx ctl 0x%lx",
>> -			(unsigned long)ioaddr->cmd_addr,
>> -			(unsigned long)ioaddr->ctl_addr);
>> -		ata_port_desc(ap, "bmdma 0x%lx",
>> -			(unsigned long)ioaddr->bmdma_addr);
>> +		ata_port_desc(ap, "cmd 0x%p ctl 0x%p",
>> +			ioaddr->cmd_addr,
>> +			ioaddr->ctl_addr);
>> +		ata_port_desc(ap, "bmdma 0x%p",
>> +			ioaddr->bmdma_addr);
>>   
>>   		mask |= 1 << i;
>>   	}
>>
> 
> I lost track of this one. Any v3 to be expected to address Sergey comment ?

    No, this patch isn't needed at all.

MBR, Sergey