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:   Tue, 18 Jul 2017 15:29:10 +0300
From:   Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>,
        Dmitri Prokhorov <Dmitry.Prohorov@...el.com>,
        Valery Cherepennikov <valery.cherepennikov@...el.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@...gle.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4]: perf/core: use rb trees for pinned/flexible groups

Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com> writes:

> +/*
> + * Helper function to test if event groups are empty;
> + */
> +static int
> +perf_event_groups_empty(struct perf_event_groups *groups)
> +{
> +	return list_empty(&groups->list);
> +}

This doesn't seem useful, it's only used once. Also, it's not clear how
access to groups->list is serialized here, but it is in the caller.

I'm assuming you will use this helper after the linked lists are done
away with, but I'll have to go fishing for that patch to make sure.

> +static void
> +perf_event_groups_insert(struct perf_event_groups *groups,
> +		struct perf_event *event)
> +{
> +	struct rb_node **node;
> +	struct rb_node *parent;
> +	struct perf_event *node_event;
> +
> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(!groups || !event);

I'm pretty sure neither of these is plausible.

> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(!list_empty(&event->group_list_entry));

So ctx::lock is held here, right? That could be a useful assert and/or
comment at least for review purposes. Now I see that it's called from
list_add_event().

Regards,
--
Alex

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ