|
Message-ID: <476DC76E7D1DF2438D32BFADF679FC563F4B8075@ORSMSX115.amr.corp.intel.com> Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2017 13:43:24 +0000 From: "Roberts, William C" <william.c.roberts@...el.com> To: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com> CC: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ker.com>, "Tejun Heo" <tj@...nel.org>, Jordan Glover <Golden_Miller83@...tonmail.ch>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <wilal.deacon@....com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Chris Fries <cfries@...gle.com>, Dave Weinstein <olorin@...gle.com>, Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>, Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH V8 0/2] printk: hash addresses printed with %p > -----Original Message----- > From: Tobin C. Harding [mailto:me@...in.cc] > Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2017 3:15 AM > To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com> > Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>; kernel- > hardening@...ts.openwall.com; Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com>; > Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>; Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux- > foundation.org>; Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>; Paolo Bonzini > <pbonzini@...hat.com>; Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ker.com>; Roberts, > William C <william.c.roberts@...el.com>; Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>; Jordan > Glover <Golden_Miller83@...tonmail.ch>; Greg KH > <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>; Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>; Joe > Perches <joe@...ches.com>; Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>; Catalin Marinas > <catalin.marinas@....com>; Will Deacon <wilal.deacon@....com>; Steven > Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>; Chris Fries <cfries@...gle.com>; Dave > Weinstein <olorin@...gle.com>; Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>; Djalal > Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 0/2] printk: hash addresses printed with %p > > On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 05:23:44PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > On (11/01/17 10:35), Tobin C. Harding wrote: > > [..] > > > Yes. The question has been raised will we be here again in 6 years > > > time trying to fix all the uses of %x. And there are already 29K > > > uses of %[xX] in tree, which of these are leaking addresses? This is why Linus' > > > has commented that really effort should be directed at finding the > > > leaks as they happen (in procfs, sysfs, dmesg) instead of fixing > > > this in the code. > > > > got it. thanks. > > > > > So far I haven't been able to come up with any meaningful way to do > > > this on 32 bit machines. There is a patch adding a script to catch > > > leaks on 64 bit machines in flight. > > > > who is expected to run that script? > > If one person runs it and finds one leaking address, I'd say it wast worth writing. If > a bunch of people with different set ups run it and we find a bunch of leaking > addresses, WIN! I wonder if the 0 day testing robot could run it.... > > Your comment did give me the idea of adding some output to the command > offering an email address to send suspicious output for those who do not wish to > investigate it further. I can put my email address if there is not a better option. > > > BTW, can BPF/eBPF printk addresses? > > I know absolutely zero about BPF/eBPF. I guess now is a good time to learn. > > > > This patch needs to be a small part of a continued effort to stop > > > the leaks if we want to have any hope of stopping them. > > > > > > If you have any suggestions on dealing with %x please do say. We > > > have code changes, compiler warnings, and checkpatch - none of which > > > immediately seem great. > > > > hm... just a huge pile of if's > > > > if (is_vmalloc_addr(addr)) > > do_hashing(addr); > > else if (__module_address(addr)) > > do_hashing(addr); > > else if (is_kernel(addr) || is_kernel_inittext(addr)) > > ... > > > > but that's going to be really messy and "iffy". > > This is the only suggestion we have so far. > > thanks, > Tobin.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.