From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755108Ab0GVFk1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:40:27 -0400 Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([222.73.24.84]:55593 "EHLO song.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751390Ab0GVFk0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:40:26 -0400 Message-ID: <4C47DAE4.1030707@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:45:08 +0800 From: Li Zefan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090513 Fedora/3.0-2.3.beta2.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steven Rostedt CC: KOSAKI Motohiro , "Theodore Ts'o" , LKML , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Frederic Weisbecker , Mathieu Desnoyers Subject: Re: [BUG] ext4 trace events cause NULL pointer dereferences References: <4C401CE3.7010004@cn.fujitsu.com> <20100721222508.8704.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <1279721766.4818.39.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <1279721766.4818.39.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 22:31 +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: >> Hi Steven, > >> if (ac) >> trace_ext4_mb_release_group_pa(ac, pa); >> >> But, I don't think this is proper fix because we don't want any overhead >> if the tracepoint is disabled. >> >> So, How do we check NULL in TP_fast_assign()? > > You could do: > > TP_fast_assign( > if (ac) { > __entry->dev = ac->ac_sb->s_dev; > __entry->ino = ac->ac_inode->i_ino; > __entry->pa_pstart = pa->pa_pstart; > __entry->pa_len = pa->pa_len; > } This leaves __entry->dev etc as arbitrary value, since the entry returned by the ring buffer is not zeroed, so I think better add an else branch to zero those values. > ), > > But this just makes the __entry null and wastes the ring buffer. > > I may be able to add a __discard_entry that may help. Then we could do > something like this: > > if (ac) { > __entry->dev = ac->ac_sb->s_dev; > __entry->ino = ac->ac_inode->i_ino; > __entry->pa_pstart = pa->pa_pstart; > __entry->pa_len = pa->pa_len; > } else > __discard_entry; > > Does this seem reasonable? > > But for now, the wasting the entry seems to be the only choice we have, > or to do as you suggested and have the "if (ac) trace_...", but I don't > like that. > As I was (and still am) not sure what is the best fix, I decided to send out a bug report instead of a patch..