Re: [PATCH v3] vsprintf: Check real user/group id for %pK

[Joe Perches]

On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 09:04 +1100, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> On 10/10/13 09:00, Joe Perches wrote:
[]
> > Move the interrupt tests and pK-error printk
> > into case 1:
> > 
> > It's the only case where CAP_SYSLOG needs to be
> > tested so it doesn't need to be above the switch.
> 
> Like I said, I think it is useful to do the pK-error check anyway. It is
> checking for internal kernel bugs, since if 'pK-error' ever gets
> printed, then some kernel code is doing the wrong thing.

I think you don't quite understand how kptr_restrict works.

If it's 0, then the ptr value is always emitted naturally.
if it's 2, then the ptr value is always emitted as 0.

> Therefore, I
> think it is useful to print it always (I would argue it even makes sense
> when kptr_restrict=0).

How?  Maybe it's me that doesn't quite understand.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/