linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf script: Support filtering by hex address

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: <60d102fa-d98a-6182-0a1d-b78122fed574@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 Jan 2021 11:31:26 +0800
From:   "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:     acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
        Linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        kan.liang@...el.com, yao.jin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf script: Support filtering by hex address

Hi Jiri,

On 1/28/2021 7:13 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>> @@ -709,6 +725,26 @@ int machine__resolve(struct machine *machine, struct addr_location *al,
>>   			ret = strlist__has_entry(symbol_conf.sym_list,
>>   						al_addr_str);
>>   		}
>> +		if (!ret && al->map) {
>> +			snprintf(al_addr_str, sz, "0x%"PRIx64,
>> +				al->map->unmap_ip(al->map, al->addr));
>> +			ret = strlist__has_entry(symbol_conf.sym_list,
>> +						 al_addr_str);
>> +			if (!ret) {
>> +				/* Check for hex without "0x" prefix */
>> +				snprintf(al_addr_str, sz, "%"PRIx64,
>> +					al->map->unmap_ip(al->map, al->addr));
>> +				ret = strlist__has_entry(symbol_conf.sym_list,
>> +							 al_addr_str);
>> +			}
> that seems tricky.. what if user specify more leading zeros,
> I think it'd be better to search intlist instead
> 
> we could move all 'address' entries from sym_list to
> new intlist (in symbol__init) and use it for this search
> 
> jirka
> 

intlist now only supports 'int' type.

I'm considering to use 'long' to replace original 'int' in struct int_node.

struct int_node {
	struct rb_node rb_node;
-	int i;
+	long i;
	void *priv;
};

On 32 bits platform, sizeof(long) is 4, and on 64 bits platform, sizeof(long) is 8. So that should 
be OK for storing the values such as pid/tid and address.

I'm not very clear why currently it uses 'int' for i in struct int_node, maybe something I don't 
understand correctly. Please correct me if my understanding is wrong.

Thanks
Jin Yao