[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170411103249.GA29545@krava>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 12:32:49 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: "Du, Changbin" <changbin.du@...el.com>
Cc: 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
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 06:13:17PM +0800, Du, Changbin wrote:
> > > >
> > > 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?
> >
> > hum, also I dont think we need to touch that bit at all
> > if we are going to remove it right away.. how about the
> > change below?
> >
> > jirka
> >
> >
> > ---
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/ui/hist.c b/tools/perf/ui/hist.c
> > index 5d632dca672a..0ee7db43dd7d 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/ui/hist.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/ui/hist.c
> > @@ -613,15 +613,15 @@ void perf_hpp__reset_output_field(struct perf_hpp_list *list)
> >
> > /* reset output fields */
> > perf_hpp_list__for_each_format_safe(list, fmt, tmp) {
> > - list_del_init(&fmt->list);
> > - list_del_init(&fmt->sort_list);
> > + list_del(&fmt->list);
> > + /* Remove the fmt from next loop processing. */
> > + list_del(&fmt->sort_list);
> > fmt_free(fmt);
> What if the fmt is not linked to sort_list? I see it is possible (please
> checking perf_hpp__setup_output_field()). I am not sure if we really has
> sunch case currently, just concern :)
if it's not linked to sort_list, then sort_list is initialized
and list_del should do no harm
jirka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists