[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id:
<175512480611.3801203.14823846312394914170.git-patchwork-notify@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 22:40:06 +0000
From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@...nel.org
To: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>@codeaurora.org
Cc: ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
martin.lau@...ux.dev, eddyz87@...il.com, song@...nel.org,
yonghong.song@...ux.dev, john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org,
sdf@...ichev.me, haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf: Don't use %pK through printk
Hello:
This patch was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
by Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>:
On Mon, 11 Aug 2025 14:08:04 +0200 you wrote:
> In the past %pK was preferable to %p as it would not leak raw pointer
> values into the kernel log.
> Since commit ad67b74d2469 ("printk: hash addresses printed with %p")
> the regular %p has been improved to avoid this issue.
> Furthermore, restricted pointers ("%pK") were never meant to be used
> through printk(). They can still unintentionally leak raw pointers or
> acquire sleeping locks in atomic contexts.
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- bpf: Don't use %pK through printk
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/2caa6b88e0ba
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists