[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55104E3D.20103@plumgrid.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:32:45 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 tip 6/9] samples: bpf: simple non-portable kprobe filter
example
On 3/23/15 12:35 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com> wrote:
>
>> +void read_trace_pipe(void)
>> +{
>> + int trace_fd;
>> +
>> + trace_fd = open(DEBUGFS "trace_pipe", O_RDONLY, 0);
>> + if (trace_fd < 0)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + while (1) {
>> + static char buf[4096];
>> + ssize_t sz;
>> +
>> + sz = read(trace_fd, buf, sizeof(buf));
>
> read() will return -1 on failure ...
>
>> + if (sz) {
>
> ... this test passes ...
>
>> + buf[sz] = 0;
>
> ... and here we smash the stack?
good point. If it was normal file, for sure it's a bug, but trace_pipe
is a pseudo file and I think read cannot return -1. Regardless, it makes
sense to fix it. Will do. Do you mind I address it as follow up patch?
Or if the rest is ok, can you change the condition to sz>0 while
applying? I can respin the whole thing too, if you like.
Thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists