linux-kernel - [PATCH] Add process name to locks warning

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20221118234357.243926-1-ak@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 18 Nov 2022 15:43:57 -0800
From:   Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:     jlayton@...nel.org
Cc:     chuck.lever@...cle.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH] Add process name to locks warning

It's fairly useless to complain about using an obsolete feature without
telling the user which process used it. My Fedora desktop randomly drops
this message, but I would really need this patch to figure out what
triggers is.

Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
---
 fs/locks.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 607f94a0e789..2e45232dbeb1 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -2096,7 +2096,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(flock, unsigned int, fd, unsigned int, cmd)
 	 * throw a warning to let people know that they don't actually work.
 	 */
 	if (cmd & LOCK_MAND) {
-		pr_warn_once("Attempt to set a LOCK_MAND lock via flock(2). This support has been removed and the request ignored.\n");
+		pr_warn_once("%s: Attempt to set a LOCK_MAND lock via flock(2). This support has been removed and the request ignored.\n", current->comm);
 		return 0;
 	}
 
-- 
2.37.3