[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: BUG: bad usercopy in memdup_user
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:36:46PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 5:22 AM, Matthew Wilcox <> wrote:
> >
> > Could we have a way to know that the printed address is hashed and not just
> > a pointer getting completely scrogged? Perhaps prefix it with ... a hash!
> > So this line would look like:
> The problem with that is that it will break tools that parse things.

Yeah, but the problem is that until people know to expect hashes, it
breaks people. I spent most of a day last week puzzling over a value
coming from a VM_BUG_ON that was explicitly tested for and couldn't

> When we find something like this, we should either remove it, fix the
> permissions, or switch to %px.

Right; I sent a patch to fix VM_BUG_ON earlier today after reading
this thread.

> But honestly, what do people expect that the pointer value will
> actually tell you if it is unhashed?

It would have been meaningful to me. For a start, I would have seen
that the bottom two bits were clear, so this was actually a pointer and
not something masquerading as a pointer.

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-19 23:17    [W:0.167 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site