linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 7/9] perf util: Get rid of read_or

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Tue, 19 Mar 2013 10:54:27 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] perf util: Get rid of read_or_die() in
 trace-event-read.c

On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 17:53 +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>
> 
> Rename it to do_read and original do_read to __do_read, and check
> their return value.
> 
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
> ---
>  tools/perf/util/trace-event-read.c | 80 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/trace-event-read.c b/tools/perf/util/trace-event-read.c
> index 62dd2168f4f5..87f0ccd54cdc 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/trace-event-read.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/trace-event-read.c
> @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ static int long_size;
>  static ssize_t calc_data_size;
>  static bool repipe;
>  
> -static int do_read(int fd, void *buf, int size)
> +static int __do_read(int fd, void *buf, int size)
>  {
>  	int rsize = size;
>  
> @@ -61,8 +61,10 @@ static int do_read(int fd, void *buf, int size)
>  		if (repipe) {
>  			int retw = write(STDOUT_FILENO, buf, ret);
>  
> -			if (retw <= 0 || retw != ret)
> -				die("repiping input file");
> +			if (retw <= 0 || retw != ret) {
> +				pr_debug("repiping input file");

Again, why debug and not err?

> +				return -1;
> +			}
>  		}
>  
>  		size -= ret;
> @@ -72,14 +74,16 @@ static int do_read(int fd, void *buf, int size)
>  	return rsize;
>  }
>  
> -static int read_or_die(void *data, int size)
> +static int do_read(void *data, int size)
>  {
>  	int r;
>  
> -	r = do_read(input_fd, data, size);
> -	if (r <= 0)
> -		die("reading input file (size expected=%d received=%d)",
> -		    size, r);
> +	r = __do_read(input_fd, data, size);
> +	if (r <= 0) {
> +		pr_debug("reading input file (size expected=%d received=%d)",
> +			 size, r);
> +		return -1;
> +	}
>  
>  	if (calc_data_size)
>  		calc_data_size += r;
> @@ -95,7 +99,7 @@ static void skip(int size)
>  
>  	while (size) {
>  		r = size > BUFSIZ ? BUFSIZ : size;
> -		read_or_die(buf, r);
> +		do_read(buf, r);

Shouldn't this check the result of do_read()?

>  		size -= r;
>  	};
>  }

-- Steve


--
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/