On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Tobin C. Harding <m...@tobin.cc> wrote: > > If you haven't wasted enough time on this can you tell me what you mean > by 'completely breaks %pK'?
The whole point of %pK is that it's a "safer" %p that doesn't leak information if you set kptr_restrict. With that patch-set, it now leaks _more_ information than %p when kptr_restrict isn't set, so %pK went from "be more careful than %p" to "be wildly less careful than %p". Not because %pK itself changed, but because the semantics of %p did. The baseline moved, and the "safe" version did not. Linus