linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] perf tests pmu: Initialize all fields of test

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: <CAM9d7ch3wYvqKE9HANvhinnBqgtnA6suzLYrd4bkFZ-wjqdOQw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 20:49:05 -0700
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Veronika Molnarova <vmolnaro@...hat.com>, 
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, James Clark <james.clark@....com>, 
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Michael Petlan <mpetlan@...hat.com>, Radostin Stoyanov <rstoyano@...hat.com>, 
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] perf tests pmu: Initialize all fields of test_pmu variable

Hi,

On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 2:09 PM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
<acme@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 01:17:13PM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 7:05 AM Veronika Molnarova <vmolnaro@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > On 8/12/24 15:03, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > > This makes the code more robust, avoiding the error recently fixed when
> > > > the .alias_name was used and contained a random value.
>
> > > > +++ b/tools/perf/tests/pmu.c
> > > > @@ -458,10 +458,10 @@ static int test__name_cmp(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int subtest __
> > > >  static int test__pmu_match(struct test_suite *test __maybe_unused, int subtest __maybe_unused)
> > > >  {
> > > > -     struct perf_pmu test_pmu;
> > > > -     test_pmu.alias_name = NULL;
> > > > +     struct perf_pmu test_pmu = {
> > > > +             .name = "pmuname",
> > > > +     };
>
> > > > -     test_pmu.name = "pmuname";
> > > >       TEST_ASSERT_EQUAL("Exact match", perf_pmu__match(&test_pmu, "pmuname"),      true);
> > > >       TEST_ASSERT_EQUAL("Longer token", perf_pmu__match(&test_pmu, "longertoken"), false);
> > > >       TEST_ASSERT_EQUAL("Shorter token", perf_pmu__match(&test_pmu, "pmu"),        false);
>
> > > Reviewed-by: Veronika Molnarova <vmolnaro@...hat.com>
>
> > This seems like a simple enough fix for a test that it could be
> > cherry-picked into perf-tools for v6.11, I'm not seeing it currently:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools.git/log/tools/perf/tests/pmu.c?h=perf-tools
>
> This is not a fix, its just to make the code more future proof by
> initializing all non explicitely initialized fields to zeros.
>
> Veronika's fix, that this improves upon, is enough for the problems
> detected so far.
>
> Or are you noticing some other bug that gets fixed by my patch?
>
> Ok, now I noticed that Veronika's fix:
>
>         https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools.git/commit/?h=perf-tools&id=37e2a19c98bf99747ca997be876dfc13f9165e0a
>
> is marked with:
>
>   perf test pmu: Set uninitialized PMU alias to null
>     Notice: this object is not reachable from any branch.
>
> Being only in perf-tools-next:
>
>   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/perf/perf-tools-next.git/commit/?h=perf-tools-next&id=37e2a19c98bf99747ca997be876dfc13f9165e0a
>
> So yeah, probably Namhyung can cherry-pick that patch (Veronika's) into
> perf-tools for v6.11.
>
> There were a few more fixes that I noticed and picked for
> perf-tools-next that then people reported that should also be
> cherry-picked for v6.11, Namhyung?

Ok, I can pick this up.  I think my perf lock contention fix also can
go to perf-tools.
What others do you want me to pick up?

Thanks,
Namhyung