linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf stat: Fix invalid output handle

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: <E93B2D0E-8862-4873-B49F-F74D83CEEDAD@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Sun, 4 Dec 2022 22:38:28 +0530
From:   Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     James Clark <james.clark@....com>
Cc:     Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.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@...nel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf stat: Fix invalid output handle



> On 01-Dec-2022, at 3:36 PM, James Clark <james.clark@....com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 30/11/2022 18:32, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 3:15 AM James Clark <james.clark@....com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> In this context, 'os' is already a pointer so the extra dereference
>>> isn't required. This fixes the following test failure on aarch64:
>>> 
>>>  $ ./perf test "json output" -vvv
>>>  92: perf stat JSON output linter                                    :
>>>  --- start ---
>>>  Checking json output: no args Test failed for input:
>>>  ...
>>>  Fatal error: glibc detected an invalid stdio handle
>>>  ---- end ----
>>>  perf stat JSON output linter: FAILED!
>>> 
>>> Fixes: e7f4da312259 ("perf stat: Pass struct outstate to printout()")
>>> Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@....com>
>> 
>> Thanks for fixing this.  I'm not sure how I missed it.. :(
>> 
> 
> It seems to only go down that path on some configuration. At least on
> x86 the test was passing fine for me.
> 
>> Acked-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
> 
> Thanks for the review!

Faced same issue on powerpc. Tested with this change and it works with this patch.

Tested-by: Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>

Thanks
Athira
> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Namhyung
>> 
>> 
>>> ---
>>> tools/perf/util/stat-display.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/stat-display.c b/tools/perf/util/stat-display.c
>>> index 847acdb5dc40..eac5ac3a734c 100644
>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/stat-display.c
>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/stat-display.c
>>> @@ -741,7 +741,7 @@ static void printout(struct perf_stat_config *config, struct outstate *os,
>>>                perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(config, counter, uval, map_idx,
>>>                                              &out, &config->metric_events, &rt_stat);
>>>        } else {
>>> -               pm(config, &os, /*color=*/NULL, /*format=*/NULL, /*unit=*/"", /*val=*/0);
>>> +               pm(config, os, /*color=*/NULL, /*format=*/NULL, /*unit=*/"", /*val=*/0);
>>>        }
>>> 
>>>        if (!config->metric_only) {
>>> --
>>> 2.25.1