On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 07:32:32AM +1100, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 7:15 AM, Tobin C. Harding <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 05:57:17AM +1100, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 8:44 PM, Petr Mladek <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > On Sun 2018-02-04 18:45:21, Adam Borowski wrote:
> >> >> Like %pK already does, print "00000000" instead.
> >> >>
> >> >> This confused people -- the convention is that "(null)" means you tried
> >> >> to
> >> >> dereference a null pointer as opposed to printing the address.
> >
> > Leaving aside what is converting to %px. If we consider that using %px
> > is meant to convey to us that we _really_ want the address, in hex hence
> > the 'x', then it is not surprising that we will get "00000000"'s for a
> > null pointer, right? Yes it is different to before but since we are
> > changing the specifier does this not imply that there may be some
> > change?
>
> I personally prefer 0000s, but if we're going to change this, we need
> to be aware of the difference.
It's easy to paint this bikeshed any color you guys want to: there's an "if"
already. My preference is also 0000; NULL would be good, too -- I just
don't want (null) as that has a special meaning in usual userspace
implementations; (null) also fits well most other modes of %p as they show
some object the argument points to. Confusion = wasted debugging time.
This is consistent with what we had before, with %pK special-cased.
> > In what is now to be expected fashion for %p the discussion appears to
> > have split into two different things - what to do with %px and what to
> > do with %pK :)
>
> I say leave %pK alone. :)
As in, printing some random (hashed) value?
Let's recap:
Currently:
not-null null
%pponies object's description (null)
%px address (null)
%pK hash hash
I'd propose:
not-null null
%pponies object's description (null)
%px address 00000000
%pK hash 00000000
The initial patch in this thread changes printk("%px",0) from (null) to
00000000; what Tobin complained about is that printk("%pK",0) prints a
random value.
Meow!
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ The bill with 3 years prison for mentioning Polish concentration
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ camps is back. What about KL Warschau (operating until 1956)?
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Zgoda? Łambinowice? Most ex-German KLs? If those were "soviet
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ puppets", Bereza Kartuska? Sikorski's camps in UK (thanks Brits!)?
