On 1 December 2017 at 16:33, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> And isn't there a specific %p modifier you should use for a kernel >> pointer. I've lost the thread here for what should, or should not, be >> done for kernel pointers these days based on the long email discussion. > > Current implementation to bypass the hashing is %px. (Though perhaps > all %px usage should include a comment with a justification?) > In this case, we're always dealing with u64 types regardless of the pointer size and physical address size. So I am leaning towards retaining the %llx, and only updating the sysfs node permissions. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
