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  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]
Date:	Tue, 14 Oct 2014 15:58:29 -0300
From:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
To:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf tools: fix off-by-one error in maps

Em Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:17:12PM +0200, Stephane Eranian escreveu:
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> <acme@...hat.com> wrote:
> > Em Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 04:17:41PM +0200, Stephane Eranian escreveu:
> >> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> >> >> +++ b/tools/perf/util/map.c
> >> >> @@ -752,7 +752,7 @@ struct map *maps__find(struct rb_root *maps, u64 ip)
> >> >>                 m = rb_entry(parent, struct map, rb_node);
> >> >>                 if (ip < m->start)
> >> >>                         p = &(*p)->rb_left;
> >> >> -               else if (ip > m->end)
> >> >> +               else if (ip >= m->end)
> >> >>                         p = &(*p)->rb_right;
> >> >>                 else
> >> >>                         return m;

> >> > I keep thinking that this change is making things unclear.

> >> > I.e. the _start_ of a map (map->start) is _in_ the map, and the _end_
> >> > of a map (map->end) is _in_ the map as well.

> >> >         if (addr > m->end)

> >> > is shorter than:

> >> >         if (addr >= m->end)

> >> > "start" and "end" should have the same rule applied, i.e. if one is in,
> >> > the other is in as well.

> >> It is okay but then we need to be consistent all across. This is not
> >> the case today.
> >> I mentioned the cases I ran into.

> > Ok, and provided a patch doing the way I thought was confusing, now its
> > my turn to use that info and come up with a patch, ok, will do that.

> You got it! ;->

struct vm_area_struct {
        /* The first cache line has the info for VMA tree walking. */

        unsigned long vm_start;         /* Our start address within vm_mm. */
        unsigned long vm_end;           /* The first byte after our end address
                                           within vm_mm. */

So these guys have been doing this far longer than me, I guess I'll bow
to this convention.

But by renaming map->end to map->end_ and looking at all the usage of
it, there are some inconsistencies...

Like symbol->{start,end} is of the [start,end] case, and to be
consistent with above needs to also move to [start,end[, will cook a
patch and send for review.

- 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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists