From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752364AbdJDJCt (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 4 Oct 2017 05:02:49 -0400
Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:58550 "EHLO
        mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752150AbdJDJCr (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 4 Oct 2017 05:02:47 -0400
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 11:02:55 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: "Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, Ian Campbell <ijc@hellion.org.uk>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        William Roberts <william.c.roberts@intel.com>,
        Chris Fries <cfries@google.com>, Dave Weinstein <olorin@google.com>
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] [RFC V2 2/6] lib: vsprintf: whitelist stack
 traces
Message-ID: <20171004090255.GA29316@kroah.com>
References: <1506816410-10230-1-git-send-email-me@tobin.cc>
 <1506816410-10230-3-git-send-email-me@tobin.cc>
 <20171002104205.GC3823@arm.com>
 <20171004085657.GC28247@kroah.com>
 <20171004085810.GA14022@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171004085810.GA14022@arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 09:58:10AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 10:56:57AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 11:42:05AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 11:06:46AM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> > > > Use the %pP functionality to explicitly allow kernel
> > > > pointers to be logged for stack traces.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tobin C. Harding <me@tobin.cc>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c | 4 ++--
> > > >  kernel/printk/printk.c    | 2 +-
> > > >  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> > > > index 5ea4b85..fe09660 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
> > > > @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ void dump_backtrace(struct pt_regs *regs, struct task_struct *tsk)
> > > >  	struct stackframe frame;
> > > >  	int skip;
> > > >  
> > > > -	pr_debug("%s(regs = %p tsk = %p)\n", __func__, regs, tsk);
> > > > +	pr_debug("%s(regs = %pP tsk = %pP)\n", __func__, regs, tsk);
> > > 
> > > Why do we care for pr_debug?
> > 
> > Because you really want the real value?  Seems to make sense to me...
> 
> Just seems like anybody debugging the kernel using pr_debug can probably
> change /proc/sys/kernel/kptr_restrict...

Ok, fair enough :)