Message-ID: <20201102170653.GB6882@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:06:53 +0000
From:   Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>
To:     Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Andre Przywara <Andre.Przywara@....com>,
        James Clark <James.Clark@....com>, Al Grant <Al.Grant@....com>,
        Wei Li <liwei391@...wei.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/21] perf arm-spe: Refactor printing string to buffer

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 02:57:09AM +0000, Leo Yan wrote:
> When outputs strings to the decoding buffer with function snprintf(),
> SPE decoder needs to detects if any error returns from snprintf() and if
> so needs to directly bail out.  If snprintf() returns success, it needs
> to update buffer pointer and reduce the buffer length so can continue to
> output the next string into the consequent memory space.
> 
> This complex logics are spreading in the function arm_spe_pkt_desc() so
> there has many duplicate codes for handling error detecting, increment
> buffer pointer and decrement buffer size.
> 
> To avoid the duplicate code, this patch introduces a new helper function
> arm_spe_pkt_snprintf() which is used to wrap up the complex logics, and
> it's used by the caller arm_spe_pkt_desc(); if printing buffer is called
> for multiple times in a flow, the error is a cumulative value and simply
> returns its final value.
> 
> This patch also moves the variable 'blen' as the function's local
> variable, this allows to remove the unnecessary braces and improve the
> readability.
> 
> Suggested-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>

This looks like a good refacroting now, but as pointed out by Andre this
patch is now rather hard to review, since it combines the refactoring
with other changes.

If reposting this series, it would be good if this could be split into a
first patch that introduces arm_spe_pkt_snprintf() and just updates each
snprintf() call site to use it, but without moving other code around or
optimising anything, followed by one or more patches that clean up and
simplify arm_spe_pkt_desc().

If the series is otherwise mature though, then this rework may be
overkill.

> ---
>  .../arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-pkt-decoder.c     | 267 ++++++++----------
>  1 file changed, 117 insertions(+), 150 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-pkt-decoder.c b/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-pkt-decoder.c
> index 04fd7fd7c15f..1ecaf9805b79 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-pkt-decoder.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/arm-spe-decoder/arm-spe-pkt-decoder.c
> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
>  #include <endian.h>
>  #include <byteswap.h>
>  #include <linux/bitops.h>
> +#include <stdarg.h>
>  
>  #include "arm-spe-pkt-decoder.h"
>  
> @@ -258,192 +259,158 @@ int arm_spe_get_packet(const unsigned char *buf, size_t len,
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(int *err, char **buf_p, size_t *blen,
> +				const char *fmt, ...)
> +{
> +	va_list ap;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	/* Bail out if any error occurred */
> +	if (err && *err)
> +		return *err;
> +
> +	va_start(ap, fmt);
> +	ret = vsnprintf(*buf_p, *blen, fmt, ap);
> +	va_end(ap);
> +
> +	if (ret < 0) {
> +		if (err && !*err)
> +			*err = ret;

What happens on buffer overrun (i.e., ret >= *blen)?

It looks to me like we'll advance buf_p too far, blen will wrap around,
and the string at *buf_p won't be null terminated.  Because the return
value is still >= 0, this condition will be returned up the stack as
"success".

Perhaps this can never happen given the actual buffer sizes and strings
being printed, but it feels a bit unsafe.


It may be better to clamp the adjustments to *buf_p and *blen to
*blen - 1 in this case, and explicitly set (*buf_p)[*blen - 1] to '\0'.
We _may_ want indicate failure in the return from arm_spe_pkt_desc() in
this situation, but I don't know enough about how this code is called to
enable me to judge that.

(Note, this issue is not introduced by this patch, but this refactoring
makes it easier to address it in a single place -- so it may now be
worth doing so.)

> +	} else {
> +		*buf_p += ret;
> +		*blen -= ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>  int arm_spe_pkt_desc(const struct arm_spe_pkt *packet, char *buf,
>  		     size_t buf_len)
>  {
> -	int ret, ns, el, idx = packet->index;
> +	int ns, el, idx = packet->index;
>  	unsigned long long payload = packet->payload;
>  	const char *name = arm_spe_pkt_name(packet->type);
> +	size_t blen = buf_len;
> +	int err = 0;
>  
>  	switch (packet->type) {
>  	case ARM_SPE_BAD:
>  	case ARM_SPE_PAD:
>  	case ARM_SPE_END:
> -		return snprintf(buf, buf_len, "%s", name);
> -	case ARM_SPE_EVENTS: {
> -		size_t blen = buf_len;
> -
> -		ret = 0;
> -		ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, "EV");
> -		buf += ret;
> -		blen -= ret;
> -		if (payload & 0x1) {
> -			ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " EXCEPTION-GEN");
> -			buf += ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
> -		}
> -		if (payload & 0x2) {
> -			ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " RETIRED");
> -			buf += ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
> -		}
> -		if (payload & 0x4) {
> -			ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " L1D-ACCESS");
> -			buf += ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
> -		}
> -		if (payload & 0x8) {
> -			ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " L1D-REFILL");
> -			buf += ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
> -		}
> -		if (payload & 0x10) {
> -			ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " TLB-ACCESS");
> -			buf += ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
> -		}
> -		if (payload & 0x20) {
> -			ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " TLB-REFILL");
> -			buf += ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
> -		}
> -		if (payload & 0x40) {
> -			ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " NOT-TAKEN");
> -			buf += ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
> -		}
> -		if (payload & 0x80) {
> -			ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " MISPRED");
> -			buf += ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
> -		}
> +		return arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, "%s", name);
> +	case ARM_SPE_EVENTS:
> +		arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, "EV");
> +
> +		if (payload & 0x1)
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " EXCEPTION-GEN");
> +		if (payload & 0x2)
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " RETIRED");
> +		if (payload & 0x4)
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " L1D-ACCESS");
> +		if (payload & 0x8)
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " L1D-REFILL");
> +		if (payload & 0x10)
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " TLB-ACCESS");
> +		if (payload & 0x20)
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " TLB-REFILL");
> +		if (payload & 0x40)
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " NOT-TAKEN");
> +		if (payload & 0x80)
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " MISPRED");
>  		if (idx > 1) {
> -			if (payload & 0x100) {
> -				ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " LLC-ACCESS");
> -				buf += ret;
> -				blen -= ret;
> -			}
> -			if (payload & 0x200) {
> -				ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " LLC-REFILL");
> -				buf += ret;
> -				blen -= ret;
> -			}
> -			if (payload & 0x400) {
> -				ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " REMOTE-ACCESS");
> -				buf += ret;
> -				blen -= ret;
> -			}
> +			if (payload & 0x100)
> +				arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " LLC-ACCESS");
> +			if (payload & 0x200)
> +				arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " LLC-REFILL");
> +			if (payload & 0x400)
> +				arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " REMOTE-ACCESS");
>  		}
> -		if (ret < 0)
> -			return ret;
> -		blen -= ret;
> -		return buf_len - blen;

It looks like we now fall off the bottom of the switch() here.  It's
preferable to add a break, both to document the intended code flow, and
to avoid accidents if another case is added later.

> -	}
> +		return err ?: (int)(buf_len - blen);

Nit: unexplained type cast.  Does the result definitely fit into an int?
If not, why doesn't it matter?


Also:

If the actual return value is important for the caller to determine the
number of bytes appended, then it would be better to compute it in one
place.  Otherwise, it would be better to squash all success returns to 0,
rather than spend effort computing a value that may be misleading or
wrong anyway.

In its current form, it's tricky to see whether this patch derives the
return value consistently for all cases.  In particular, if some code
patch does one or more arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(), followed by a
return arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(); then the return value (which only takes
the last arm_spe_pkt_desc() into account) would be wrong.  It would be
preferable if the return value for the success case were always
computed from buf_len and blen, to avoid this risk.  (I'm not saying
this bug exists, just that it's hard to see from the patch that it
doesn't exist.)

> +
>  	case ARM_SPE_OP_TYPE:
>  		switch (idx) {
> -		case 0:	return snprintf(buf, buf_len, "%s", payload & 0x1 ?
> -					"COND-SELECT" : "INSN-OTHER");
> -		case 1:	{
> -			size_t blen = buf_len;
> +		case 0:
> +			return arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen,
> +					payload & 0x1 ? "COND-SELECT" : "INSN-OTHER");
> +		case 1:
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen,
> +					     payload & 0x1 ? "ST" : "LD");
>  
> -			if (payload & 0x1)
> -				ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, "ST");
> -			else
> -				ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, "LD");
> -			buf += ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
>  			if (payload & 0x2) {
> -				if (payload & 0x4) {
> -					ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " AT");
> -					buf += ret;
> -					blen -= ret;
> -				}
> -				if (payload & 0x8) {
> -					ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " EXCL");
> -					buf += ret;
> -					blen -= ret;
> -				}
> -				if (payload & 0x10) {
> -					ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " AR");
> -					buf += ret;
> -					blen -= ret;
> -				}
> +				if (payload & 0x4)
> +					arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " AT");
> +				if (payload & 0x8)
> +					arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " EXCL");
> +				if (payload & 0x10)
> +					arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " AR");
>  			} else if (payload & 0x4) {
> -				ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " SIMD-FP");
> -				buf += ret;
> -				blen -= ret;
> -			}
> -			if (ret < 0)
> -				return ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
> -			return buf_len - blen;
> -		}
> -		case 2:	{
> -			size_t blen = buf_len;
> -
> -			ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, "B");
> -			buf += ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
> -			if (payload & 0x1) {
> -				ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " COND");
> -				buf += ret;
> -				blen -= ret;
> -			}
> -			if (payload & 0x2) {
> -				ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, " IND");
> -				buf += ret;
> -				blen -= ret;
> +				arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " SIMD-FP");
>  			}
> -			if (ret < 0)
> -				return ret;
> -			blen -= ret;
> -			return buf_len - blen;
> -			}
> -		default: return 0;
> +
> +			return err ?: (int)(buf_len - blen);
> +
> +		case 2:
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, "B");
> +
> +			if (payload & 0x1)
> +				arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " COND");
> +			if (payload & 0x2)
> +				arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, " IND");
> +
> +			return err ?: (int)(buf_len - blen);
> +
> +		default:
> +			return 0;
>  		}
>  	case ARM_SPE_DATA_SOURCE:
>  	case ARM_SPE_TIMESTAMP:
> -		return snprintf(buf, buf_len, "%s %lld", name, payload);
> +		return arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, "%s %lld", name, payload);
>  	case ARM_SPE_ADDRESS:
>  		switch (idx) {
>  		case 0:
>  		case 1: ns = !!(packet->payload & NS_FLAG);
>  			el = (packet->payload & EL_FLAG) >> 61;
>  			payload &= ~(0xffULL << 56);
> -			return snprintf(buf, buf_len, "%s 0x%llx el%d ns=%d",
> +			return arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen,
> +					"%s 0x%llx el%d ns=%d",
>  				        (idx == 1) ? "TGT" : "PC", payload, el, ns);
> -		case 2:	return snprintf(buf, buf_len, "VA 0x%llx", payload);
> +		case 2:
> +			return arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen,
> +						    "VA 0x%llx", payload);
>  		case 3:	ns = !!(packet->payload & NS_FLAG);
>  			payload &= ~(0xffULL << 56);
> -			return snprintf(buf, buf_len, "PA 0x%llx ns=%d",
> -					payload, ns);
> -		default: return 0;
> +			return arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen,
> +						    "PA 0x%llx ns=%d", payload, ns);
> +		default:
> +			return 0;
>  		}
>  	case ARM_SPE_CONTEXT:
> -		return snprintf(buf, buf_len, "%s 0x%lx el%d", name,
> -				(unsigned long)payload, idx + 1);
> -	case ARM_SPE_COUNTER: {
> -		size_t blen = buf_len;
> -
> -		ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, "%s %d ", name,
> -			       (unsigned short)payload);
> -		buf += ret;
> -		blen -= ret;
> +		return arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, "%s 0x%lx el%d",
> +					    name, (unsigned long)payload, idx + 1);
> +	case ARM_SPE_COUNTER:
> +		arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, "%s %d ", name,
> +				     (unsigned short)payload);
> +
>  		switch (idx) {
> -		case 0:	ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, "TOT"); break;
> -		case 1:	ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, "ISSUE"); break;
> -		case 2:	ret = snprintf(buf, buf_len, "XLAT"); break;
> -		default: ret = 0;
> +		case 0:
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, "TOT");
> +			break;
> +		case 1:
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, "ISSUE");
> +			break;
> +		case 2:
> +			arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, "XLAT");
> +			break;
> +		default:
> +			break;
>  		}
> -		if (ret < 0)
> -			return ret;
> -		blen -= ret;
> -		return buf_len - blen;
> -	}
> +
> +		return err ?: (int)(buf_len - blen);
> +
>  	default:
>  		break;
>  	}
>  
> -	return snprintf(buf, buf_len, "%s 0x%llx (%d)",
> -			name, payload, packet->index);
> +	return arm_spe_pkt_snprintf(&err, &buf, &blen, "%s 0x%llx (%d)",
> +				    name, payload, packet->index);

Otherwise, the patch looks generally OK, but I'd like to see an answer
on my points above.

Cheers
---Dave

Powered by blists - more mailing lists