linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/10] perf script python: Fix string vs byte array resolving

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: <20160712133552.GA30438@krava>
Date:	Tue, 12 Jul 2016 15:35:52 +0200
From:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] perf script python: Fix string vs byte array
 resolving

On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 09:00:01AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:52:45 +0200
> Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> > hum, so string is not passed to trace buffer with 0 at the end?
> 
> strlen() returns only the length of the string (minus the \0 at the
> end).

yea, is_printable_array is called here on tracepoint
data that's why I asked.. is 0 part of the string data
when stored within tracepoint?

> 
> > 
> > I'll check the option of passing everything as PyByteArray.
> > If it's the same for user, we'll have simpler code in here.
> > 
> > > 
> > > because the last byte wont be 0. What about:
> > > 
> > > 	for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
> > > 		if (!isprint(p[i]) && !isspace(p[i]))
> > > 			break;
> > > 
> > > 	return i == len ||
> > > 		(i == len - 1 && p[i] == 0);  
> 
> Or you can do:
> 
> 	if (p[len - 1] == 0)
> 		len--;
> 
> 	for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
> 		if (!isprint(p[i]) && !isspace(p[i]))
> 			return 0;
> 	return 1;

yep, seems good.. thanks

jirka