summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/lib/list_debug.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorMatthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>2018-04-10 16:33:06 -0700
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2018-04-11 10:28:35 -0700
commit68c1f08203f2b06b3b888229b1524cfbfe51660d (patch)
treebea95dca78b080042951cb038efeb6a48622c060 /lib/list_debug.c
parent317506009216f5103e185fe626d61361a899909d (diff)
downloadlinux-stable-68c1f08203f2b06b3b888229b1524cfbfe51660d.tar.gz
linux-stable-68c1f08203f2b06b3b888229b1524cfbfe51660d.tar.bz2
linux-stable-68c1f08203f2b06b3b888229b1524cfbfe51660d.zip
lib/list_debug.c: print unmangled addresses
The entire point of printing the pointers in list_debug is to see if there's any useful information in them (eg poison values, ASCII, etc); obscuring them to see if they compare equal makes them much less useful. If an attacker can force this message to be printed, we've already lost. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180401223237.GV13332@bombadil.infradead.org Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com> Reviewed-by: Tobin C. Harding <me@tobin.cc> Reviewed-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'lib/list_debug.c')
-rw-r--r--lib/list_debug.c14
1 files changed, 7 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/lib/list_debug.c b/lib/list_debug.c
index a34db8d27667..5d5424b51b74 100644
--- a/lib/list_debug.c
+++ b/lib/list_debug.c
@@ -21,13 +21,13 @@ bool __list_add_valid(struct list_head *new, struct list_head *prev,
struct list_head *next)
{
if (CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next->prev != prev,
- "list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
+ "list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev (%px), but was %px. (next=%px).\n",
prev, next->prev, next) ||
CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(prev->next != next,
- "list_add corruption. prev->next should be next (%p), but was %p. (prev=%p).\n",
+ "list_add corruption. prev->next should be next (%px), but was %px. (prev=%px).\n",
next, prev->next, prev) ||
CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(new == prev || new == next,
- "list_add double add: new=%p, prev=%p, next=%p.\n",
+ "list_add double add: new=%px, prev=%px, next=%px.\n",
new, prev, next))
return false;
@@ -43,16 +43,16 @@ bool __list_del_entry_valid(struct list_head *entry)
next = entry->next;
if (CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next == LIST_POISON1,
- "list_del corruption, %p->next is LIST_POISON1 (%p)\n",
+ "list_del corruption, %px->next is LIST_POISON1 (%px)\n",
entry, LIST_POISON1) ||
CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(prev == LIST_POISON2,
- "list_del corruption, %p->prev is LIST_POISON2 (%p)\n",
+ "list_del corruption, %px->prev is LIST_POISON2 (%px)\n",
entry, LIST_POISON2) ||
CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(prev->next != entry,
- "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %p, but was %p\n",
+ "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %px, but was %px\n",
entry, prev->next) ||
CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next->prev != entry,
- "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %p, but was %p\n",
+ "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %px, but was %px\n",
entry, next->prev))
return false;