From: Eugene Loh <eugene.loh@oracle.com>
To: Kris Van Hees <kris.van.hees@oracle.com>
Cc: dtrace@lists.linux.dev, dtrace-devel@oss.oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Need -w for destructive actions, even if clause is not used
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 14:15:18 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <65fbbdeb-54af-ff2a-cef3-ebf019f6393d@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aIze8ZQ2iBFSf0J5@oracle.com>
On 8/1/25 11:36, Kris Van Hees wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 12:40:24AM -0400, eugene.loh@oracle.com wrote:
>> From: Eugene Loh <eugene.loh@oracle.com>
>>
>> If a clause includes a destructive action but -w is not used, dtrace
>> should not start up, even if the clause is ignored (due to -Z).
>> Solaris treated this as a runtime error. We should do the same.
>>
>> diff --git a/test/unittest/options/err.no-w-or-destructive2.d b/test/unittest/options/err.no-w-or-destructive2.d
>> new file mode 100644
>> @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
>> +/*
>> + * ASSERTION: Without -w or -xdestructive, destructive operations are not ok,
>> + * even if a clause will be ignored since it does not exist and
>> + * -Z was specified.
> This could do with some rewriting.
Sorry, what does "this" refer to? The comment, the test, or the patch?
> The issue is that DTrace used to always
> load all tracing programs, and the kernel would activate them as needed. We
> now only load programs for enabled probes (and with -Z active, we may load
> some programs later).
>
> What we need to be testing here is that if any clauses of a tracing script
> contain destructive actions, and we are using the script for probing, then
> an error should be reported unless we are allowing destructive actions (-w
> or -xdestructive).
I think we have such a test?
The case being tested here is where a destructive action is specified,
no -w is specified, but the clause will not be exercised since the probe
does not exist and -Z allows us to ignore it. In this case, should the
script be accepted or rejected? The patch says the script should be
rejected, which was the legacy behavior. (People familiar with the
legacy implementation may understand why the legacy behavior was what it
was, but the question now is whether that behavior should be changed.)
>> +/* @@runtest-opts: -Z */
>> +
>> +bogus:bogus:bogus:bogus
>> +{
>> + system("echo ok");
>> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-01 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-11 4:40 [PATCH] Need -w for destructive actions, even if clause is not used eugene.loh
2025-07-15 10:59 ` Nick Alcock
2025-07-17 16:37 ` Eugene Loh
2025-07-22 13:36 ` Nick Alcock
2025-08-01 15:36 ` Kris Van Hees
2025-08-01 17:49 ` Kris Van Hees
2025-08-01 18:02 ` Eugene Loh
2025-08-01 18:19 ` Kris Van Hees
2025-08-01 18:15 ` Eugene Loh [this message]
2025-08-01 18:22 ` Kris Van Hees
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=65fbbdeb-54af-ff2a-cef3-ebf019f6393d@oracle.com \
--to=eugene.loh@oracle.com \
--cc=dtrace-devel@oss.oracle.com \
--cc=dtrace@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=kris.van.hees@oracle.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox