[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140515083730.GF30445@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 10:37:30 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [perf] yet another 32/64-bit range check failure
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 01:07:34AM -0400, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Apr 2014, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 23 Apr 2014, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> > > Something like so should do I suppose.
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Subject: perf: Fix perf_event_open(.flags) test
> > >
> > > Vince noticed that we test the (unsigned long) flags field against an
> > > (unsigned int) constant. This would allow setting the high bits on 64bit
> > > platforms and not get an error.
> > >
> > > There is nothing that uses the high bits, so it should be entirely
> > > harmless, but we don't want userspace to accidentally set them anyway,
> > > so fix the constants.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
> > > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> >
> > Tested-by: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
> >
> > Your patch fixes the problem, or at least the test I wrote to check the
> > issue now fails properly.
>
> Even though this isn't as pressing an issue as the other perf_event
> problems, I wanted to make sure this patch didn't get forgotten...
Thanks for reminding me, got it queued now.
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists