linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] libperf cpumap: Correct reference count for perf_cpu_map_

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: <dd674533-4d9c-4298-b6c3-9196b270f68b@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 10:40:27 +0100
From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@....com>
To: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
 Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
 Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
 Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
 "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
 James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] libperf cpumap: Correct reference count for
 perf_cpu_map__merge()



On 10/11/24 10:34, Leo Yan wrote:

>> The 2 non-test uses of perf_cpu_map__merge both do:
>>
>>          a = perf_cpu_map__merge(a, b);
>>
>> so another way to make the API less misleading would be
>> to introduce:
>>
>>          err = perf_cpu_map__merge_in(&a, b);
>>
>> where:
>>
>> int perf_cpu_map__merge_in(struct perf_cpu_map **orig, struct perf_cpu_map 
>> *other)
>> {
>>          struct perf_cpu_map *result = perf_cpu_map__merge(*orig, other);
>>
>>          if (!result)
>>                  return -ENOMEM;
>>
>>          *orig = result;
>>          return 0;
>> }
>>
>> without any changes to perf_cpu_map__merge().
> 
> Just wandering why we cannot do the same thing for the perf_cpu_map__merge()
> function?
> 
>    int perf_cpu_map__merge_in(struct perf_cpu_map **orig,
>                               struct perf_cpu_map *other)

Sorry for typo and spamming. The above suggested definition is for 
perf_cpu_map__merge().


> This can allow us to avoid any confusion in the first place. And we don't need
> to maintain two functions for the same thing.
> 
> Thanks,
> Leo
> 
>