linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] perf: probe_finder: continue if atleast one probe point found

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAD=GYpZg=zAHBLpfCaDhNVbhXxmdqar6pETrnvBaOYRrGHSB4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 1 Mar 2016 02:36:38 -0800
From:	Joel Fernandes <agnel.joel@...il.com>
To:	平松雅巳 / HIRAMATU，MASAMI 
	<masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Cc:	"ltc-kernel@...yrl.intra.hitachi.co.jp" 
	<ltc-kernel@...yrl.intra.hitachi.co.jp>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	Taeung Song <treeze.taeung@...il.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel.opensrc@...il.com>,
	"linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org" <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
	sysp-manager <cti.systems-productivity-manager.ts@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] perf: probe_finder: continue if atleast one probe point found

Sorry about the line wrapping, I sent this email through g-mail.
Shouldn't have any issue when I send the final patch through git
send-email.

Thanks,
Joel

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 2:34 AM, Joel Fernandes <agnel.joel@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi Hiramatu,
>
> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:29 PM, 平松雅巳 / HIRAMATU，MASAMI
> <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com> wrote:
>> BTW,
>>
>> ./perf probe  \
>>   -k ./vmlinux -s ./ -x /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 -a 'malloc $params'
>>
>> might help your case. $params is expanded to function parameters automatically
>> and if there is no parameters, it is just ignored :)
>
> Thanks, I agree this is a better approach.
>
> How about an informative error letting the user know about it? Is the
> below Ok? I can send a patch.
>
> ----x8--------
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/probe-finder.c b/tools/perf/util/probe-finder.c
> index 4ce5c5e..21f282a 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/probe-finder.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/probe-finder.c
> @@ -1247,8 +1247,12 @@ static int add_probe_trace_event(Dwarf_Die
> *sc_die, struct probe_finder *pf)
>                 pf->tvar = &tev->args[i];
>                 /* Variable should be found from scope DIE */
>                 ret = find_variable(sc_die, pf);
> -               if (ret != 0)
> +               if (ret != 0) {
> +                       pr_err("Variable couldn't be found, if probe
> is on inline function,"
> +                              "try '%s' or '%s' instead.\n",
> +                              PROBE_ARG_PARAMS, PROBE_ARG_VARS);
>                         break;
> +               }
>         }