From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751489AbdFFLFA (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jun 2017 07:05:00 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46328 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751390AbdFFLE7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jun 2017 07:04:59 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 2A5E99F740 Authentication-Results: ext-mx10.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx10.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=jolsa@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 2A5E99F740 Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 13:04:54 +0200 From: Jiri Olsa To: David Carrillo-Cisneros Cc: linux-kernel , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Alexander Shishkin , Andi Kleen , Simon Que , Wang Nan , Jiri Olsa , He Kuang , Masami Hiramatsu , David Ahern , Namhyung Kim , Stephane Eranian , Paul Turner Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/13] perf tools: add feature header record to pipe-mode Message-ID: <20170606110454.GB5061@krava> References: <20170523074853.54892-1-davidcc@google.com> <20170523074853.54892-14-davidcc@google.com> <20170525081004.GO14467@krava> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.39]); Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:04:59 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 06:32:50PM -0700, David Carrillo-Cisneros wrote: > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:48:53AM -0700, David Carrillo-Cisneros wrote: > > > > SNIP > > > >> +int perf_event__synthesize_features(struct perf_tool *tool, > >> + struct perf_session *session, > >> + struct perf_evlist *evlist, > >> + perf_event__handler_t process) > >> +{ > >> + struct perf_header *header = &session->header; > >> + struct feat_fd fdd; > >> + struct feature_event *fe; > >> + size_t sz, sz_hdr; > >> + int feat, ret; > >> + > >> + sz_hdr = sizeof(fe->header); > >> + sz = sizeof(union perf_event); > >> + /* get a nice alignment */ > >> + sz = PERF_ALIGN(sz, getpagesize()); > >> + > >> + memset(&fdd, 0, sizeof(fdd)); > >> + > >> + fdd.buf = malloc(sz); > >> + if (!fdd.buf) > >> + return -ENOMEM; > >> + > >> + fdd.size = sz - sz_hdr; > >> + > >> + for_each_set_bit(feat, header->adds_features, HEADER_FEAT_BITS) { > >> + if (!feat_ops[feat].has_record) { > >> + pr_debug("No record header feature for header :%d\n", feat); > >> + continue; > >> + } > >> + > >> + fdd.offset = sizeof(*fe); > >> + > >> + ret = feat_ops[feat].write(&fdd, evlist); > >> + if (ret || fdd.offset <= (ssize_t)sizeof(*fe)) { > >> + pr_debug("Error writing feature\n"); > >> + continue; > >> + } > >> + > >> + /* fdd.buf may have changed due to realloc in do_write() */ > > > > right, so how's ensured the data never cross the maximum event size (0xffff) ? > > > > I think do_write should have some check on that > > do_write reallocates ff->buff when it's not large enough. and what if it's bigger than 0xffff? jirka