[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANFS6bYCjHtX6A2KReT0ePkVri7Efmj4upG9P4Le7gUMEgDppg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 17:16:27 +0900
From: Hyeoncheol Lee <hyc.lee@...il.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
acme@...stprotocols.net, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com" <yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf probe: convert_name_to_addr() allocated the wrong
size buffer for a function name
Hi,
2012/10/16 Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>:
> * Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com> [2012-10-16 13:19:57]:
>
>> (2012/10/16 10:37), Hyeoncheol Lee wrote:
>> > convert_name_to_addr() allocated sizeof(char *) * MAX_PROBE_ARGS
>> > bytes for a function name
>>
>> Yeah, that one was from my laziness...
>>
>
> Guess not your fault, but mine.
>
>> >
>> > Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
>> > Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> > Signed-off-by: Hyeoncheol Lee <hyc.lee@...il.com>
>> > ---
>> > tools/perf/util/probe-event.c | 5 +++--
>> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c b/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c
>> > index 49a256e..bb40ed4 100644
>> > --- a/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c
>> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c
>> > @@ -2352,13 +2352,14 @@ static int convert_name_to_addr(struct perf_probe_event *pev, const char *exec)
>> > free(exec_copy);
>> > }
>> > free(pp->function);
>> > - pp->function = zalloc(sizeof(char *) * MAX_PROBE_ARGS);
>> > + pp->function = zalloc(sizeof(char) *
>> > + (3 + sizeof(unsigned long long) * 2));
>>
>> Could you comment that this is enough long here?
>
> Also can we move the arith into a macro?
>
I will do.
>>
>> > if (!pp->function) {
>> > ret = -ENOMEM;
>> > pr_warning("Failed to allocate memory by zalloc.\n");
>> > goto out;
>> > }
>> > - e_snprintf(pp->function, MAX_PROBE_ARGS, "0x%llx", vaddr);
>> > + sprintf(pp->function, "0x%llx", vaddr);
>>
>> And at least we should use snprintf instead of sprintf...
>> (I think ret = e_snprintf(...) is better)
>>
>
> Agree.
Yes
>
>> > ret = 0;
>> >
>> > out:
>> >
>>
>
> --
> Thanks and Regards
> Srikar
>
Thank you for your comment.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists