From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751929AbdK3K0p (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Nov 2017 05:26:45 -0500 Received: from mail-pl0-f54.google.com ([209.85.160.54]:34423 "EHLO mail-pl0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750918AbdK3K0o (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Nov 2017 05:26:44 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYeoHGBNY3wwczFpfdp8IpvspwL143d20EWd3wdY1tRRDB0+jeeSum/p9NnmDTMz0r87GSC8A== Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 19:26:38 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky To: David Laight Cc: "'Andrew Morton'" , "Tobin C. Harding" , "kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com" , Linus Torvalds , "Jason A. Donenfeld" , "Theodore Ts'o" , Kees Cook , Paolo Bonzini , Tycho Andersen , "Roberts, William C" , Tejun Heo , Jordan Glover , Greg KH , Petr Mladek , Joe Perches , Ian Campbell , Sergey Senozhatsky , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Steven Rostedt , Chris Fries , Dave Weinstein , Daniel Micay , Djalal Harouni , Radim =?iso-8859-1?Q?Krcm=E1r?= , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Network Development , David Miller , Stephen Rothwell , Andrey Ryabinin , Alexander Potapenko , Dmitry Vyukov Subject: Re: [PATCH V11 0/5] hash addresses printed with %p Message-ID: <20171130102638.GA434@jagdpanzerIV> References: <1511921105-3647-1-git-send-email-me@tobin.cc> <20171129152040.ed5b28c198093de8968aac9b@linux-foundation.org> <28ab447e24684c58a5e03af44edd6d5a@AcuMS.aculab.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <28ab447e24684c58a5e03af44edd6d5a@AcuMS.aculab.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On (11/30/17 10:23), David Laight wrote: [..] > > Maybe I'm being thick, but... if we're rendering these addresses > > unusable by hashing them, why not just print something like > > "" in their place? That loses the uniqueness thing but I > > wonder how valuable that is in practice? > > My worry is that is you get a kernel 'oops' print with actual register > values you have no easy way of tying an address or address+offset to > the corresponding hash(address) printed elsewhere. print the existing hash:pointer mappings in panic()? [if we can do that] -ss