On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 10:44 AM, David Laight wrote:
> From: Al Viro
>> Sent: 19 December 2017 21:49
>> > I suspect that an "offset and size within the kernel object" value
>> > might make sense. But what does the _pointer_ tell you?
>>
>> Well, for example seeing a 0xfff4 where a po
From: Al Viro
> Sent: 19 December 2017 21:49
> > I suspect that an "offset and size within the kernel object" value
> > might make sense. But what does the _pointer_ tell you?
>
> Well, for example seeing a 0xfff4 where a pointer to object
> must have been is a pretty strong hint to s
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 8:05 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> And yes, we had a few cases where the hashing actually did hide the
> values, and I've been applying patches to turn those from %p to %px.
So far at least:
10a7e9d84915 Do not hash userspace addresses in fault handlers
85c3e4a5a185 m
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 7:50 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 09:48:49PM +, Al Viro wrote:
>> Well, for example seeing a 0xfff4 where a pointer to object
>> must have been is a pretty strong hint to start looking for a way for
>> that ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM) having ende
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 09:48:49PM +, Al Viro wrote:
> Well, for example seeing a 0xfff4 where a pointer to object
> must have been is a pretty strong hint to start looking for a way for
> that ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM) having ended up there... Something like
> 0x6e69622f7273752f is almost
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:36:46PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> I suspect that an "offset and size within the kernel object" value
>> might make sense. But what does the _pointer_ tell you?
>
> Well, for example seeing a 0xfff4 wh
On 12/19/2017 01:36 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 5:22 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Could we have a way to know that the printed address is hashed and not just
a pointer getting completely scrogged? Perhaps prefix it with ... a hash!
So this line would look like:
The proble
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:36:46PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 5:22 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >
> > Could we have a way to know that the printed address is hashed and not just
> > a pointer getting completely scrogged? Perhaps prefix it with ... a hash!
> > So this li
On 12/19/2017 01:48 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:36:46PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> I suspect that an "offset and size within the kernel object" value
>> might make sense. But what does the _pointer_ tell you?
>
> Well, for example seeing a 0xfff4 where a po
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> In this case, there's obviously no permission issue: it's an error
> report. So it's either "remove it, or switch to %px".
Yup, my intention was to kill this %p and enhance the report to
actually include the useful information like, "what i
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:36:46PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I suspect that an "offset and size within the kernel object" value
> might make sense. But what does the _pointer_ tell you?
Well, for example seeing a 0xfff4 where a pointer to object
must have been is a pretty strong
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 5:22 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> Could we have a way to know that the printed address is hashed and not just
> a pointer getting completely scrogged? Perhaps prefix it with ... a hash!
> So this line would look like:
The problem with that is that it will break tools tha
Adding Linus
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:12:05PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Tetsuo Handa
> wrote:
> > Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Matthew Wilcox
> >> wrote:
> >> >> > >> This BUG is reporting
> >> >> > >>
> >> >> > >> [ 26.0897
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 05:22:46AM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 07:37:46PM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 09:12:58AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 1:57 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Te
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Tetsuo Handa
wrote:
> Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> >> > >> This BUG is reporting
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> [ 26.089789] usercopy: kernel memory overwrite attempt detected to
>> >> > >> 22a5b430 (kmalloc-1
Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >> > >> This BUG is reporting
> >> > >>
> >> > >> [ 26.089789] usercopy: kernel memory overwrite attempt detected to
> >> > >> 22a5b430 (kmalloc-1024) (1024 bytes)
> >> > >>
> >> > >> line. But isn't 000
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> > >> This BUG is reporting
>> > >>
>> > >> [ 26.089789] usercopy: kernel memory overwrite attempt detected to
>> > >> 22a5b430 (kmalloc-1024) (1024 bytes)
>> > >>
>> > >> line. But isn't 22a5b430 strange for kmalloc(1024,
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 07:37:46PM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 09:12:58AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 1:57 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Tetsuo Handa
> > >> This BUG is reporting
> > >>
> > >> [ 26.089789] use
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> On 2017/12/18 22:40, syzbot wrote:
>> >> >>> Hello,
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> syzkaller hit the following crash on
>> >> >>> 6084b576dca2e898f5c101baef151f7bfdbb606d
>> >> >>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/gi
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 09:41:39AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> On 2017/12/18 22:40, syzbot wrote:
> >> >>> Hello,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> syzkaller hit the following crash on
> >> >>> 6084b576dca2e898f5c101baef151f7bfdbb6
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
>> > wrote:
>> >> On 2017/12/18 22:40, syzbot wrote:
>> >>> Hello,
>> >>>
>> >>> syzkaller hit the following crash on
>> >>> 6084b576dca2e898f5c101baef151f7bfdbb606d
>> >>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 09:12:58AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 1:57 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Tetsuo Handa
> > wrote:
> >> On 2017/12/18 22:40, syzbot wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> syzkaller hit the following crash on
> >>> 6084b576dca2
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 1:57 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Tetsuo Handa
> wrote:
>> On 2017/12/18 22:40, syzbot wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> syzkaller hit the following crash on
>>> 6084b576dca2e898f5c101baef151f7bfdbb606d
>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Tetsuo Handa
wrote:
> On 2017/12/18 22:40, syzbot wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> syzkaller hit the following crash on 6084b576dca2e898f5c101baef151f7bfdbb606d
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/master
>> compiler: gcc (GCC) 7.1.1 20170620
On 2017/12/18 22:40, syzbot wrote:
> Hello,
>
> syzkaller hit the following crash on 6084b576dca2e898f5c101baef151f7bfdbb606d
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/master
> compiler: gcc (GCC) 7.1.1 20170620
> .config is attached
> Raw console output is attached.
>
>
25 matches
Mail list logo