> -----Original Message----- > From: linus971@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:linus971@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Linus > Torvalds > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 4:17 PM > To: Tobin C. Harding <me@xxxxxxxx> > Cc: kernel-hardening@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; KVM list <kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; > Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Kees Cook > <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>; Tycho > Andersen <tycho@xxxxxxxxxx>; Roberts, William C > <william.c.roberts@xxxxxxxxx>; Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jordan Glover > <Golden_Miller83@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; > Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx>; Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Ian > Campbell <ijc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sergey Senozhatsky > <sergey.senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxx>; Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>; > Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>; Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>; > Chris Fries <cfries@xxxxxxxxxx>; Dave Weinstein <olorin@xxxxxxxxxx>; Daniel > Micay <danielmicay@xxxxxxxxx>; Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] add %pX specifier > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Tobin C. Harding <me@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > This patch is a softer version of Linus' suggestion because it does > > not change the behaviour of the %p specifier. I don't see the benefit > > in making such a breaking change without addressing the issue of %x (and I > don't the balls to right now). > > The thing is, this continues to have the exact same issue that %pK has > - because it is opt-in, effectively nobody will actually use it. > > That's why I would suggest that if we do this way, we really change %p and %pa > to use the hashed value, to convert *everybody*. And then people who have a > good reason to actually expose the pointer have to do the extra work and opt > out. Yes we cannot make this opt in or there is really no point in doing it. %pK and mistakes got us here to this point. I see there is multiple threads, this getting really fun to follow. > > Linus
