linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf lock: fix segfault with info subcommand following move to libtraceevent

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

Message-ID: <20120706171431.GF7533@infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:14:32 -0300
From:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
To:	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf lock: fix segfault with info subcommand following
 move to libtraceevent

Em Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 10:02:18AM -0600, David Ahern escreveu:
> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c
> @@ -877,6 +877,9 @@ static int read_events(void)
>  	if (!session)
>  		die("Initializing perf session failed\n");
>  
> +	if (!perf_session__has_traces(session, "lock record"))
> +		exit(1);
> +
>  	return perf_session__process_events(session, &eops);
>  }

This is getting out of hand, first a die(), then an exit(1) and finally
this function returns a value, ouch.

I'd rather use return to signal that something went wrong and as well
print some helpful warning to the user.

Eventually we should fix all the other offenders, but lets try not to
add even more.

Can you please resend with a pr_warning + return failure?

- Arnaldo
--
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/