linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/6] perf report: hint .perfconfig error when invalid sorting key

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: <20170413145350.GR3275@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 13 Apr 2017 11:53:50 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:     David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Simon Que <sque@...omium.org>,
        Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        He Kuang <hekuang@...wei.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] perf report: hint .perfconfig error when invalid
 sorting key

Em Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 09:34:37AM -0700, David Carrillo-Cisneros escreveu:
> > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 11:49:17PM -0700, David Carrillo-Cisneros wrote:
> >> My fat-fingering of sort keys in .perfconfig was a common cause of
> >> perf report silently terminating without apparent error.
> >>
> >> This was because 1) error in setup_sorting in cmd_report was ignored
> >> and 2) no message was log in UI browser that would prevent UI from
> >> exit before user prompt. Fix both.
> >
> > there's UI init ahead of this code.. I had to move it
> > below your code to spot any error message
> >
> > there's other errors further on.. perhaps we should move it even further ;-)
> > or cancel the ui before the error is printed
> 
> Probably canceling ui on error is the more robust way to go. I will
> look into it.

So I'll wait for a v2 for this specific patch.