lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
Subject[PATCH] list_debug: Print unmangled addresses
From: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>

The entire point of printing the pointers in list_debug is to see if
there's any useful information in them (eg poison values, ASCII, etc);
obscuring them to see if they compare equal makes them much less useful.
If an attacker can force this message to be printed, we've already lost.

Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>

diff --git a/lib/list_debug.c b/lib/list_debug.c
index a34db8d27667..5d5424b51b74 100644
--- a/lib/list_debug.c
+++ b/lib/list_debug.c
@@ -21,13 +21,13 @@ bool __list_add_valid(struct list_head *new, struct list_head *prev,
struct list_head *next)
{
if (CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next->prev != prev,
- "list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
+ "list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev (%px), but was %px. (next=%px).\n",
prev, next->prev, next) ||
CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(prev->next != next,
- "list_add corruption. prev->next should be next (%p), but was %p. (prev=%p).\n",
+ "list_add corruption. prev->next should be next (%px), but was %px. (prev=%px).\n",
next, prev->next, prev) ||
CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(new == prev || new == next,
- "list_add double add: new=%p, prev=%p, next=%p.\n",
+ "list_add double add: new=%px, prev=%px, next=%px.\n",
new, prev, next))
return false;

@@ -43,16 +43,16 @@ bool __list_del_entry_valid(struct list_head *entry)
next = entry->next;

if (CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next == LIST_POISON1,
- "list_del corruption, %p->next is LIST_POISON1 (%p)\n",
+ "list_del corruption, %px->next is LIST_POISON1 (%px)\n",
entry, LIST_POISON1) ||
CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(prev == LIST_POISON2,
- "list_del corruption, %p->prev is LIST_POISON2 (%p)\n",
+ "list_del corruption, %px->prev is LIST_POISON2 (%px)\n",
entry, LIST_POISON2) ||
CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(prev->next != entry,
- "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %p, but was %p\n",
+ "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %px, but was %px\n",
entry, prev->next) ||
CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next->prev != entry,
- "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %p, but was %p\n",
+ "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %px, but was %px\n",
entry, next->prev))
return false;

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-04-02 00:34    [W:0.051 / U:1.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site