linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf session: Fix infinite loop on invalid perf.data file

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: <20131001165437.GF2920@ghostprotocols.net>
Date:	Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:54:37 -0300
From:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf session: Fix infinite loop on invalid perf.data file

Em Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 05:33:09PM +0200, Ingo Molnar escreveu:
> 
> * David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 10/1/13 8:21 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >But if I understood it correctly this particular message could trigger for
> > >regular users of perf as well, of the perf record is terminated in some
> > >unusual fashion. Regular users might not have the perf code handy (and
> > >might not know about git grep either).
> > 
> > This is the case I was referring to -- normal users don't care about
> > the code reference, hence the more specific question about how the
> > perf-record session ended.
> 
> Hm, what do you call 'code reference'?
> 
> The message I suggested is:
> 
>   WARNING: perf/header: Data size is 0. Was the 'perf record' command properly terminated?
> 
> I didn't intend 'perf/header' to be a code reference - it wanted to refer 
> to the perf.data header. Maybe that should be formulated in a less 
> confusing manner? Something like:
 
I liked this last one:

>   WARNING: The perf.data file's data size field is 0 which is unexpected.
>            Was the 'perf record' command properly terminated?

Can I patch that up into Namhyung's latest patch?

Sonny, David, from your replies I think I can add Tested-by: tags for
both of you?

Thanks,

- 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/