From: "Thomas Weißschuh" <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun@kernel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev,
"Thomas Weißschuh" <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/4] lib/vsprintf: Validate spinlock context during restricted pointer formatting
Date: Mon, 04 May 2026 12:47:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260504-restricted-pointers-final-v2-0-4934933503e5@linutronix.de> (raw)
Depending on the system configuration, the restricted pointer formatting
might call into the security subsystem which takes spinlocks, which
might sleep under PREEMPT_RT. As %pK is intended to be only used from
read handlers of virtual files, which always run in task context,
this should not be a problem in practice.
However, developers have used %pK before from atomic context without
realizing this restriction.
Add a lockdep annotation to unconditionally introduce a fake spinlock in
restricted_pointer(), so lockdep can detect misuse even if the current
test system configuration would not exhibit the issue.
---
Changes in v2:
- Use custom lock_map over might_sleep()
- Also assert IRQ context
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260317-restricted-pointers-final-v1-1-b4dca0ed6483@linutronix.de
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun@kernel.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>
To: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
Thomas Weißschuh (4):
locking/lockdep: Add a helper to validate the locking context without a lock
locking/lockdep: Add a guard for lock_map_acquire()
lib/vsprintf: Validate spinlock context during restricted pointer formatting
lib/vsprintf: Always check interrupt context restrictions
include/linux/lockdep.h | 11 +++++++++++
lib/vsprintf.c | 13 +++++++++++++
2 files changed, 24 insertions(+)
---
base-commit: 254f49634ee16a731174d2ae34bc50bd5f45e731
change-id: 20260107-restricted-pointers-final-cd24979fd752
Best regards,
--
Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
next reply other threads:[~2026-05-04 10:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-04 10:47 Thomas Weißschuh [this message]
2026-05-04 10:47 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] locking/lockdep: Add a helper to validate the locking context without a lock Thomas Weißschuh
2026-05-04 10:47 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] locking/lockdep: Add a guard for lock_map_acquire() Thomas Weißschuh
2026-05-04 10:47 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] lib/vsprintf: Validate spinlock context during restricted pointer formatting Thomas Weißschuh
2026-05-04 10:47 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] lib/vsprintf: Always check interrupt context restrictions Thomas Weißschuh
2026-05-04 13:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-05-04 13:02 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-05-04 13:20 ` Thomas Weißschuh
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=20260504-restricted-pointers-final-v2-0-4934933503e5@linutronix.de \
--to=thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=senozhatsky@chromium.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox