lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/20] torture: Prepare scripting for shift from %p to %pK
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Paul E. McKenney
<paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 02:13:38PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
>> From: Paul E. McKenney
>> > Sent: 04 December 2017 13:42
>> > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 12:32:30PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
>> > > From: Paul E. McKenney
>> > > > Sent: 01 December 2017 20:09
>> > > >
>> > > > Because %p prints "(null)" and %pK prints "0000000000000000" or (on
>> > > > 32-bit systems) "00000000", this commit adjusts torture-test scripting
>> > > > accordingly.
>> > >
>> > > Surely NULL v not-NULL is one bit of info that the message needs to contain?
>> >
>> > Indeed. So the script needs to check for the strings "00000000",
>> > "0000000000000000", and "(null) in the console output". The "(null)"
>> > is what "%p" prints for a NULL pointer, and the other two strings are
>> > what "%pK" prints for a NULL pointer.
>> >
>> > Or am I missing your point?
>>
>> I was thinking that even %pK should print "(null)".
>
> That was my expectation, as in the need for this patch came as a
> surprise to me.
>
>> Perhaps it should have printed a fixed, non-zero value for non-zero
>> pointers.
>
> I must leave this to the people who have a dog in that contest. ;-)

Since there is an ongoing discussion with security people near to %pK
and alike, I added Kees and Linus to Cc list.

The proposed change can be done easily, though I have no knowledge
about possible implications.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-10 13:53    [W:0.160 / U:1.348 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site