[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170411082550.GA5894@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:25:50 +0800
From: "Du, Changbin" <changbin.du@...el.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: "Du, Changbin" <changbin.du@...el.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf: fix double free at function
perf_hpp__reset_output_field
> > (gdb) print fmt.sort_list
> > $5 = {next = 0x9727d0 <perf_hpp_list+16>, prev = 0x9727d0 <perf_hpp_list+16>}
> >
> > In this case, the fmt is linked in sort_list, but not in list. So crash
> > at the list_del_init(&fmt->list) of second loop.
>
> so the only place I can see the POISON could get there
> is in perf_hpp__column_unregister.. can't we just get
> rid of it like below
>
> jirka
>
>
> ---
> diff --git a/tools/perf/ui/hist.c b/tools/perf/ui/hist.c
> index 5d632dca672a..7577effbf746 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/ui/hist.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/ui/hist.c
> @@ -529,7 +529,7 @@ void perf_hpp_list__prepend_sort_field(struct perf_hpp_list *list,
>
> void perf_hpp__column_unregister(struct perf_hpp_fmt *format)
> {
> - list_del(&format->list);
> + list_del_init(&format->list);
> }
>
yes, this is an option. But for safety, I sugguest do not rely on list_del_init.
No rule rather than create one.
But anyway, both are ok for me. What's your options?
> void perf_hpp__cancel_cumulate(void)
--
Thanks,
Changbin Du
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists