linux-kernel - Re: perf report: fix off-by-one for non-activation frames

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]

Date:   Sat, 17 Jun 2017 13:13:11 +0200
From:   Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@...b.com>
To:     Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@...hat.com>
Cc:     Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <Linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-perf-users <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Yao Jin <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: perf report: fix off-by-one for non-activation frames

On Samstag, 17. Juni 2017 10:04:02 CEST Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 09:56:57 +0200, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > Not sure whether it needs be fixed or not.  If we fix it, srcline and
> > address would not match so it can give its own confusion to users.
> > Ideally it should display an addressof the instruction before the
> > address IMHO.
> 
> One can figure million ways how it can behave and each one has its pros and
> cons.  I was just describing the current behavior of GDB and LLDB which
> people are used to already.

Personally, I agree with Jan that we should mimick existing tool's behavior. I 
just fear that it's not trivial to do it with the current code base...

-- 
Milian Wolff | milian.wolff@...b.com | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company
Tel: +49-30-521325470
KDAB - The Qt Experts