linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 28 Apr 2015 15:40:58 +0100
From:	Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
	"mingo\@redhat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra \(Intel\)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: make ftrace_print_array_seq compute buf_len


Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> writes:

> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 15:22:02 +0100
> Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@....com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 01:17:48PM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> > The only caller to this function was getting it wrong. I favoured
>> 
>> What caller?
>> 
>> Wrong in what way?
>
> Yes, please add that info to the change log.

It was ftrace's own __print_array, I'll add the info to v2.

>
>> 
>> > pushing the calculation to as close to the need as possible rather than
>> > fixing the one caller.
>> 
>> This seems reasonable, but...
>> 
>> > 
>> > Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>
>> > ---
>> >  include/linux/ftrace_event.h | 2 +-
>> >  kernel/trace/trace_output.c  | 3 ++-
>> >  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> > 
>> > diff --git a/include/linux/ftrace_event.h b/include/linux/ftrace_event.h
>> > index c674ee8..e6b0262 100644
>> > --- a/include/linux/ftrace_event.h
>> > +++ b/include/linux/ftrace_event.h
>> > @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ const char *ftrace_print_hex_seq(struct trace_seq *p,
>> >  				 const unsigned char *buf, int len);
>> >  
>> >  const char *ftrace_print_array_seq(struct trace_seq *p,
>> > -				   const void *buf, int buf_len,
>> > +				   const void *buf, int len,
>> 
>> How is the name "len" less confusing than "buf_len"?
>> 
>> I suggest matching the name to the equivalent argument of the
>> __print_array macro -- i.e., "count".
>
> I agree, please change the variable name to "count", that will make more
> sense.

OK I'll re-spin today.

>
> Thanks,
>
> -- Steve

-- 
Alex Bennée
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/