All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 18:20:50 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1305076850.19586.196.camel@Joe-Laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1305076246.2939.67.camel@work-vm>

On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 18:10 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 17:51 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 17:23 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> > > Acessing task->comm requires proper locking. However in the past
> > > access to current->comm could be done without locking. This
> > > is no longer the case, so all comm access needs to be done
> > > while holding the comm_lock.
> > Could misuse of %ptc (not using current) cause system lockup?
> It very well could. Although I don't see other %p options tring to
> handle invalid pointers. Any suggestions on how to best handle this?

The only one I know of is ipv6 which copies a 16 byte buffer
in case the pointed to value is unaligned.  I suppose %pI6c
could be a problem or maybe %pS too, but it hasn't been in
practice.  The use of %ptc somehow seemed more error prone.

> Most users are current, so forcing the more rare
> non-current users to copy it to a buffer first and use the normal %s
> would not be of much impact.
> 
> Although I'm not sure if there's precedent for a %p value that didn't
> take a argument. Thoughts on that? Anyone else have an opinion here?

The uses of %ptc must add an argument or else gcc will complain.
I suggest you just ignore the argument value and use current.



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 18:20:50 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1305076850.19586.196.camel@Joe-Laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1305076246.2939.67.camel@work-vm>

On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 18:10 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 17:51 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 17:23 -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> > > Acessing task->comm requires proper locking. However in the past
> > > access to current->comm could be done without locking. This
> > > is no longer the case, so all comm access needs to be done
> > > while holding the comm_lock.
> > Could misuse of %ptc (not using current) cause system lockup?
> It very well could. Although I don't see other %p options tring to
> handle invalid pointers. Any suggestions on how to best handle this?

The only one I know of is ipv6 which copies a 16 byte buffer
in case the pointed to value is unaligned.  I suppose %pI6c
could be a problem or maybe %pS too, but it hasn't been in
practice.  The use of %ptc somehow seemed more error prone.

> Most users are current, so forcing the more rare
> non-current users to copy it to a buffer first and use the normal %s
> would not be of much impact.
> 
> Although I'm not sure if there's precedent for a %p value that didn't
> take a argument. Thoughts on that? Anyone else have an opinion here?

The uses of %ptc must add an argument or else gcc will complain.
I suggest you just ignore the argument value and use current.


--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-05-11  1:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 76+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-11  0:23 [RFC][PATCH 0/3] v2 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-11  0:23 ` John Stultz
2011-05-11  0:23 ` [PATCH 1/3] comm: Introduce comm_lock seqlock to protect task->comm access John Stultz
2011-05-11  0:23   ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 17:39   ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-11 17:39     ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-12 22:00   ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:00     ` David Rientjes
2011-05-11  0:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-11  0:23   ` John Stultz
2011-05-11  0:51   ` Joe Perches
2011-05-11  0:51     ` Joe Perches
2011-05-11  1:10     ` John Stultz
2011-05-11  1:10       ` John Stultz
2011-05-11  1:16       ` john stultz
2011-05-11  1:16         ` john stultz
2011-05-11  1:20       ` Joe Perches [this message]
2011-05-11  1:20         ` Joe Perches
2011-05-12 22:12         ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:12           ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:29           ` Joe Perches
2011-05-12 22:29             ` Joe Perches
2011-05-13 21:56             ` David Rientjes
2011-05-13 21:56               ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:10       ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:10         ` David Rientjes
2011-05-11  9:33   ` Américo Wang
2011-05-11  9:33     ` Américo Wang
2011-05-11 21:02     ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 21:02       ` John Stultz
2011-05-12 10:43       ` Américo Wang
2011-05-12 10:43         ` Américo Wang
2011-05-12 10:45         ` Américo Wang
2011-05-12 10:45           ` Américo Wang
2011-05-12 18:01         ` John Stultz
2011-05-12 18:01           ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 17:36   ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-11 17:36     ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-11 21:04     ` John Stultz
2011-05-11 21:04       ` John Stultz
2011-05-11  0:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] comm: ext4: Protect task->comm access by using %ptc John Stultz
2011-05-11  0:23   ` John Stultz
2011-05-12 22:14   ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:14     ` David Rientjes
2011-05-12 22:29     ` John Stultz
2011-05-12 22:29       ` John Stultz
2011-05-12 22:34       ` Andrew Morton
2011-05-12 22:34         ` Andrew Morton
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-05-12 23:02 [PATCH 0/3] v3 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-12 23:02 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-12 23:02   ` John Stultz
2011-05-16 21:19 [PATCH 0/3] v4 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-16 21:19 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-16 21:19   ` John Stultz
2011-05-16 21:54   ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-16 21:54     ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-16 23:10     ` John Stultz
2011-05-16 23:10       ` John Stultz
2011-05-16 23:56       ` Joe Perches
2011-05-16 23:56         ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17  0:11         ` John Stultz
2011-05-17  0:11           ` John Stultz
2011-05-17  7:21         ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17  7:21           ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-18  0:32   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-18  0:32     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-17 20:47 [PATCH 0/3] v5 Improve task->comm locking situation John Stultz
2011-05-17 20:47 ` [PATCH 2/3] printk: Add %ptc to safely print a task's comm John Stultz
2011-05-17 20:47   ` John Stultz
2011-05-17 21:42   ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 21:42     ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 21:52     ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 21:52       ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 22:04       ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 22:04         ` Jiri Slaby
2011-05-17 22:17         ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 22:17           ` Joe Perches
2011-05-17 22:17     ` John Stultz
2011-05-17 22:17       ` John Stultz

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1305076850.19586.196.camel@Joe-Laptop \
    --to=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.