| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20160317232722.GC5194@sejong>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 08:27:22 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Taeung Song <treeze.taeung@...il.com>
CC: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] perf config: Introduce perf_config_set class
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:10:12PM +0900, Taeung Song wrote:
> Hi, Namhyung
>
> On 03/17/2016 09:31 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> >Hi Taeung,
> >
> >On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 09:16:05PM +0900, Taeung Song wrote:
> >>This infrastructure code was designed for
> >>upcoming features of perf-config.
> >>
> >>That collect config key-value pairs from user and
> >>system config files (i.e. user wide ~/.perfconfig
> >>and system wide $(sysconfdir)/perfconfig)
> >>to manage perf's configs.
> >>
> >>Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
> >>Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
> >>Signed-off-by: Taeung Song <treeze.taeung@...il.com>
> >>---
> >> tools/perf/builtin-config.c | 1 +
> >> tools/perf/util/config.c | 123 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> tools/perf/util/config.h | 21 ++++++++
> >> 3 files changed, 145 insertions(+)
> >> create mode 100644 tools/perf/util/config.h
> >>
> >>diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-config.c b/tools/perf/builtin-config.c
> >>index c42448e..412c725 100644
> >>--- a/tools/perf/builtin-config.c
> >>+++ b/tools/perf/builtin-config.c
> >>@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
> >> #include <subcmd/parse-options.h>
> >> #include "util/util.h"
> >> #include "util/debug.h"
> >>+#include "util/config.h"
> >>
> >> static bool use_system_config, use_user_config;
> >>
> >>diff --git a/tools/perf/util/config.c b/tools/perf/util/config.c
> >>index 4e72763..b9660e4 100644
> >>--- a/tools/perf/util/config.c
> >>+++ b/tools/perf/util/config.c
> >>@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
> >> #include <subcmd/exec-cmd.h>
> >> #include "util/hist.h" /* perf_hist_config */
> >> #include "util/llvm-utils.h" /* perf_llvm_config */
> >>+#include "config.h"
> >>
> >> #define MAXNAME (256)
> >>
> >>@@ -506,6 +507,128 @@ out:
> >> return ret;
> >> }
> >>
> >>+static struct perf_config_item *find_config(struct list_head *config_list,
> >>+ const char *section,
> >>+ const char *name)
> >>+{
> >>+ struct perf_config_item *config;
> >>+
> >>+ list_for_each_entry(config, config_list, list) {
> >>+ if (!strcmp(config->section, section) &&
> >>+ !strcmp(config->name, name))
> >>+ return config;
> >>+ }
> >
> >Hmm.. why do you remove the section list?
> >
>
> IMHO, there are several reasons
>
> 1) To use only one list (default config, custom config(user/system))
>
> 1-1) I used two list that were 'list_head sections'
> and 'config_item default_configs[]'. So if checking
> type of config variable, two for-loop must be needed
> for each list. Because two structure was different i.e.
>
> 'sections' list mean config_section list
> that each section contain config_element list.
> (there wasn't telling about correct type of 'value' instead of string(char
> *))
>
> struct config_element {
> char *name;
> char *value;
> struct list_head list;
> };
>
> struct config_section {
> char *name;
> struct list_head element_head;
> struct list_head list;
> };
>
> 'struct config_item default_configs[]' mean all default configs.
>
> struct config_item {
> const char *section;
> const char *name;
> union {
> bool b;
> int i;
> u32 l;
> u64 ll;
> float f;
> double d;
> const char *s;
> } value;
> enum config_type type;
> const char *desc;
> };
>
>
> IMHO, I think this is a bit complex
> and I want to simplify the perf's config list on perf-config.
>
> 2) A small number of perf's configs
>
> I think perf's configs aren't too many so I think
> two structure for section and element aren't needed.
OK.
>
> 3) A object for a config variable need to have enough info for itself
>
> This is a bit similar to 1) reason.
> If using only 'struct config_item' for the config list,
> it can contain section name, name, values(default, user config,
> system config, both config), correct type, etc.
>
> If we do, we needn't to find detail for a config variable at other objects
> e.g.
> When we find correct type of a config variable,
> we needn't to do for-loop for default_configs[] in order to know the
> type.
I'm not sure I understand you correctly, but I think this is not
related to the two-level structure.
>
>
> I think this is better than old two structure.
>
> >>+
> >>+ return NULL;
> >>+}
> >>+
> >>+static struct perf_config_item *add_config(struct list_head *config_list,
> >>+ const char *section,
> >>+ const char *name)
> >>+{
> >>+ struct perf_config_item *config = zalloc(sizeof(*config));
> >>+
> >>+ if (!config)
> >>+ return NULL;
> >>+
> >>+ config->section = strdup(section);
> >>+ if (!section)
> >>+ goto out_err;
> >>+
> >>+ config->name = strdup(name);
> >>+ if (!name) {
> >>+ free((char *)config->section);
> >>+ goto out_err;
> >>+ }
> >>+
> >>+ list_add_tail(&config->list, config_list);
> >>+ return config;
> >>+
> >>+out_err:
> >>+ free(config);
> >>+ pr_err("%s: strdup failed\n", __func__);
> >>+ return NULL;
> >>+}
> >>+
> >>+static int set_value(struct perf_config_item *config, const char *value)
> >>+{
> >>+ char *val = strdup(value);
> >>+
> >>+ if (!val)
> >>+ return -1;
> >>+ config->value = val;
> >
> >It seems to overwrite old value..
> >
>
> Yes, I know it.
> If don't using '--user' or '--system',
> there isn't exclusive config file path
> then have to read both config files.
>
> But because user config file has a high order of priority,
> if two config file has same variable, old value(for system config)
> must be overwrote by new value(for user config).
But shouldn't it free the old value before overwriting?
Thanks,
Namhyung
>
> >
> >
> >>+
> >>+ return 0;
> >>+}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists