[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <90ea1b1c-26f5-3928-4897-536e576d2b4a@iogearbox.net>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 16:20:48 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, namhyung@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] tools: bpf: fix NULL return handling in
bpf__prepare_load
On 05/15/2018 04:11 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Sun, May 13, 2018 at 01:20:22AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann escreveu:
>> [ +Arnaldo ]
>>
>> On 05/11/2018 01:21 PM, YueHaibing wrote:
>>> bpf_object__open()/bpf_object__open_buffer can return error pointer or NULL,
>>> check the return values with IS_ERR_OR_NULL() in bpf__prepare_load and
>>> bpf__prepare_load_buffer
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
>>> ---
>>> tools/perf/util/bpf-loader.c | 6 +++---
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> This should probably be routed via Arnaldo due to the fix in perf itself. If
>> there's no particular preference on which tree, we could potentially route it
>> as well via bpf with Acked-by from Arnaldo, but that is up to him. Arnaldo,
>> any preference?
>
> I'm preparing a pull req right now, and working a bit on perf's BPF
> support, so why not, I'll merge it, thanks,
Sounds good, thanks Arnaldo!
> - Arnaldo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists