On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 06:43:24PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:41:29 +1100
> "Tobin C. Harding" wrote:
>
> > Current suggestion on list is to remove this function. Do you have a use
> > case in mind where debugging will break? We could add a fix to this
>
On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:41:29 +1100
"Tobin C. Harding" wrote:
> Current suggestion on list is to remove this function. Do you have a use
> case in mind where debugging will break? We could add a fix to this
> series if so. Otherwise next version will likely drop
>
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017, at 20:55, Felix Fietkau wrote:
> On 2017-12-18 00:53, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> > Currently if kallsyms_lookup() fails to find the symbol then the address
> > is printed. This potentially leaks sensitive information. Instead of
> > printing the address we can return an error,
On 2017-12-18 00:53, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> Currently if kallsyms_lookup() fails to find the symbol then the address
> is printed. This potentially leaks sensitive information. Instead of
> printing the address we can return an error, giving the calling code the
> option to print the address or
Currently if kallsyms_lookup() fails to find the symbol then the address
is printed. This potentially leaks sensitive information. Instead of
printing the address we can return an error, giving the calling code the
option to print the address or print some sanitized message.
Return error instead