[PATCH] epoll: don't printk pointer value

[PATCH] epoll: don't printk pointer value

[Robert Love]

Davide,

I really cannot think of a good reason why eventpoll_init() should print
a pointer value to user-space - especially the value of current?

I do not think this is good practice and someone might even consider it
a security hole.  Personally, I would prefer to remove the "successfully
initialized" message altogether, but at the very least can we not print
current's address?

	Robert Love


 fs/eventpoll.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)


diff -urN linux-2.5.51/fs/eventpoll.c linux/fs/eventpoll.c
--- linux-2.5.51/fs/eventpoll.c	2002-12-09 21:45:54.000000000 -0500
+++ linux/fs/eventpoll.c	2002-12-11 01:23:07.000000000 -0500
@@ -1573,7 +1573,7 @@
 	if (IS_ERR(eventpoll_mnt))
 		goto eexit_4;
 
-	printk(KERN_INFO "[%p] eventpoll: successfully initialized.\n", current);
+	printk(KERN_INFO "eventpoll: successfully initialized.\n", current);
 
 	return 0;
 

Re: [PATCH] epoll: don't printk pointer value

[William Lee Irwin III]

On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 01:27:25AM -0500, Robert Love wrote:
> I really cannot think of a good reason why eventpoll_init() should print
> a pointer value to user-space - especially the value of current?
> I do not think this is good practice and someone might even consider it
> a security hole.  Personally, I would prefer to remove the "successfully
> initialized" message altogether, but at the very least can we not print
> current's address?

You're still passing current as an argument to the printk.


Bill

Re: [PATCH] epoll: don't printk pointer value

[Robert Love]

On Wed, 2002-12-11 at 01:30, William Lee Irwin III wrote:

> You're still passing current as an argument to the printk.

Ah crap.  That is what I get for not testing it... nothing is too
trivial, boys and girls.

Thanks, Bill.

	Robert Love

 fs/eventpoll.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)


diff -urN linux-2.5.51/fs/eventpoll.c linux/fs/eventpoll.c
--- linux-2.5.51/fs/eventpoll.c	2002-12-09 21:45:54.000000000 -0500
+++ linux/fs/eventpoll.c	2002-12-11 01:23:07.000000000 -0500
@@ -1573,7 +1573,7 @@
 	if (IS_ERR(eventpoll_mnt))
 		goto eexit_4;
 
-	printk(KERN_INFO "[%p] eventpoll: successfully initialized.\n", current);
+	printk(KERN_INFO "eventpoll: successfully initialized.\n");
 
 	return 0;
 

Re: [PATCH] epoll: don't printk pointer value

[Andrew Morton]

Robert Love wrote:
> 
> ...
> --- linux-2.5.51/fs/eventpoll.c 2002-12-09 21:45:54.000000000 -0500
> +++ linux/fs/eventpoll.c        2002-12-11 01:23:07.000000000 -0500
> @@ -1573,7 +1573,7 @@
>         if (IS_ERR(eventpoll_mnt))
>                 goto eexit_4;
> 
> -       printk(KERN_INFO "[%p] eventpoll: successfully initialized.\n", current);
> +       printk(KERN_INFO "eventpoll: successfully initialized.\n");
> 

Guys, it's noise.  Just nuke it.

Re: [PATCH] epoll: don't printk pointer value

[Robert Love]

On Wed, 2002-12-11 at 01:41, Andrew Morton wrote:

> Guys, it's noise.  Just nuke it.

So I would prefer...

	Robert Love

 fs/eventpoll.c |    2 --
 1 files changed, 2 deletions(-)


diff -urN linux-2.5.51/fs/eventpoll.c linux/fs/eventpoll.c
--- linux-2.5.51/fs/eventpoll.c	2002-12-09 21:45:54.000000000 -0500
+++ linux/fs/eventpoll.c	2002-12-11 01:43:59.000000000 -0500
@@ -1573,8 +1573,6 @@
 	if (IS_ERR(eventpoll_mnt))
 		goto eexit_4;
 
-	printk(KERN_INFO "[%p] eventpoll: successfully initialized.\n", current);
-
 	return 0;
 
 eexit_4:

Re: [PATCH] epoll: don't printk pointer value

[William Lee Irwin III]

Robert Love wrote:
>> ...

On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 10:41:30PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Guys, it's noise.  Just nuke it.

Fine by me. I just notice the format string business.


Bill

Re: [PATCH] epoll: don't printk pointer value

[Davide Libenzi]

On Tue, 11 Dec 2002, Robert Love wrote:

> Davide,
>
> I really cannot think of a good reason why eventpoll_init() should print
> a pointer value to user-space - especially the value of current?
>
> I do not think this is good practice and someone might even consider it
> a security hole.  Personally, I would prefer to remove the "successfully
> initialized" message altogether, but at the very least can we not print
> current's address?

It's ok Robert, it was used for debugging purposes and now it can be
completely removed ( the whole printk() ). I'll post a patch to Linus that
removes the printk() ...



- Davide