linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf dlfilter: Add a test for resolve

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: <CAP-5=fW+Y+4dk_TL2RuOJWwnqd3cvhVARoRVSdmhiiVaNwEnfw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 Aug 2023 10:28:29 -0700
From:   Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc:     Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf dlfilter: Add a test for resolve_address()

On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 1:51 PM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Em Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 12:18:55PM +0300, Adrian Hunter escreveu:
> > Extend the "dlfilter C API" test to test
> > perf_dlfilter_fns.resolve_address(). The test currently fails, but passes
> > after a subsequent patch.
>
> Ian,
>
>         I think this is ok now, can you please take a look and perhaps
> provide an Acked-by or Reviewed-by?

Sorry, found this in my backlog. I'm a little confused over which
patch series is current but they all lgtm.

Reviewed-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>

Thanks,
Ian

> - Arnaldo
>
> > Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
> > ---
> >  tools/perf/dlfilters/dlfilter-test-api-v0.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/dlfilters/dlfilter-test-api-v0.c b/tools/perf/dlfilters/dlfilter-test-api-v0.c
> > index b1f51efd67d6..72f263d49121 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/dlfilters/dlfilter-test-api-v0.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/dlfilters/dlfilter-test-api-v0.c
> > @@ -254,6 +254,30 @@ static int check_addr_al(void *ctx)
> >       return 0;
> >  }
> >
> > +static int check_address_al(void *ctx, const struct perf_dlfilter_sample *sample)
> > +{
> > +     struct perf_dlfilter_al address_al;
> > +     const struct perf_dlfilter_al *al;
> > +
> > +     al = perf_dlfilter_fns.resolve_ip(ctx);
> > +     if (!al)
> > +             return test_fail("resolve_ip() failed");
> > +
> > +     address_al.size = sizeof(address_al);
> > +     if (perf_dlfilter_fns.resolve_address(ctx, sample->ip, &address_al))
> > +             return test_fail("resolve_address() failed");
> > +
> > +     CHECK(address_al.sym && al->sym);
> > +     CHECK(!strcmp(address_al.sym, al->sym));
> > +     CHECK(address_al.addr == al->addr);
> > +     CHECK(address_al.sym_start == al->sym_start);
> > +     CHECK(address_al.sym_end == al->sym_end);
> > +     CHECK(address_al.dso && al->dso);
> > +     CHECK(!strcmp(address_al.dso, al->dso));
> > +
> > +     return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> >  static int check_attr(void *ctx)
> >  {
> >       struct perf_event_attr *attr = perf_dlfilter_fns.attr(ctx);
> > @@ -290,7 +314,7 @@ static int do_checks(void *data, const struct perf_dlfilter_sample *sample, void
> >       if (early && !d->do_early)
> >               return 0;
> >
> > -     if (check_al(ctx) || check_addr_al(ctx))
> > +     if (check_al(ctx) || check_addr_al(ctx) || check_address_al(ctx, sample))
> >               return -1;
> >
> >       if (early)
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
>
> --
>
> - Arnaldo