On Fri, 10 May 2019 18:32:58 +0200 Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 10 May 2019 12:24:01 -0400 > Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, 10 May 2019 10:42:13 +0200 > > Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > static const char *check_pointer_msg(const void *ptr) > > > { > > > - char byte; > > > - > > > if (!ptr) > > > return "(null)"; > > > > > > - if (probe_kernel_address(ptr, byte)) > > > + if ((unsigned long)ptr < PAGE_SIZE || IS_ERR_VALUE(ptr)) > > > return "(efault)"; > > > > > > > > > < PAGE_SIZE ? > > > > do you mean: < TASK_SIZE ? > > The check with < TASK_SIZE would break on s390. The 'ptr' is > in the kernel address space, *not* in the user address space. > Remember s390 has two separate address spaces for kernel/user > the check < TASK_SIZE only makes sense with a __user pointer. > So we allow this to read user addresses? Can't that cause a fault? If the condition is true, we return "(efault)". -- Steve