linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf tools: Refactor LLVM test warning for missing binary

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YS5yiJPuCH+9CLV3@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 31 Aug 2021 15:18:48 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:     James Clark <james.clark@....com>
Cc:     linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf tools: Refactor LLVM test warning for missing
 binary

Em Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 03:54:59PM +0100, James Clark escreveu:
> The same warning is duplicated in two places so refactor it into a
> single function "search_program_and_warn". This will be used a third
> time in a later commit.

Thanks, applied the three patches.

- Arnaldo

 
> Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@....com>
> ---
>  tools/perf/util/llvm-utils.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/llvm-utils.c b/tools/perf/util/llvm-utils.c
> index cbd9b268f168..cec9c16efb17 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/llvm-utils.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/llvm-utils.c
> @@ -38,6 +38,8 @@ struct llvm_param llvm_param = {
>  	.user_set_param = false,
>  };
>  
> +static void version_notice(void);
> +
>  int perf_llvm_config(const char *var, const char *value)
>  {
>  	if (!strstarts(var, "llvm."))
> @@ -108,6 +110,21 @@ search_program(const char *def, const char *name,
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int search_program_and_warn(const char *def, const char *name,
> +				   char *output)
> +{
> +	int ret = search_program(def, name, output);
> +
> +	if (ret) {
> +		pr_err("ERROR:\tunable to find %s.\n"
> +		       "Hint:\tTry to install latest clang/llvm to support BPF. Check your $PATH\n"
> +		       "     \tand '%s-path' option in [llvm] section of ~/.perfconfig.\n",
> +		       name, name);
> +		version_notice();
> +	}
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>  #define READ_SIZE	4096
>  static int
>  read_from_pipe(const char *cmd, void **p_buf, size_t *p_read_sz)
> @@ -458,16 +475,10 @@ int llvm__compile_bpf(const char *path, void **p_obj_buf,
>  	if (!template)
>  		template = CLANG_BPF_CMD_DEFAULT_TEMPLATE;
>  
> -	err = search_program(llvm_param.clang_path,
> +	err = search_program_and_warn(llvm_param.clang_path,
>  			     "clang", clang_path);
> -	if (err) {
> -		pr_err(
> -"ERROR:\tunable to find clang.\n"
> -"Hint:\tTry to install latest clang/llvm to support BPF. Check your $PATH\n"
> -"     \tand 'clang-path' option in [llvm] section of ~/.perfconfig.\n");
> -		version_notice();
> +	if (err)
>  		return -ENOENT;
> -	}
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * This is an optional work. Even it fail we can continue our
> @@ -495,14 +506,9 @@ int llvm__compile_bpf(const char *path, void **p_obj_buf,
>  	force_set_env("WORKING_DIR", kbuild_dir ? : ".");
>  
>  	if (opts) {
> -		err = search_program(llvm_param.llc_path, "llc", llc_path);
> -		if (err) {
> -			pr_err("ERROR:\tunable to find llc.\n"
> -			       "Hint:\tTry to install latest clang/llvm to support BPF. Check your $PATH\n"
> -			       "     \tand 'llc-path' option in [llvm] section of ~/.perfconfig.\n");
> -			version_notice();
> +		err = search_program_and_warn(llvm_param.llc_path, "llc", llc_path);
> +		if (err)
>  			goto errout;
> -		}
>  
>  		err = -ENOMEM;
>  		if (asprintf(&pipe_template, "%s -emit-llvm | %s -march=bpf %s -filetype=obj -o -",
> -- 
> 2.28.0

-- 

- Arnaldo