Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 Feb 2019 09:34:11 +0100 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf trace: Fix potential USE_AFTER_FREE problem |
| |
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 12:23:56AM -0500, Bo YU wrote: > From: Bo Yu <tsu.yubo@gmail.com> > > There is a freed pointer "evsel", so fix it. > > Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1442595("Memory-illegalaccesses > (USE_AFTER_FREE)") > Fixes: 6ab3bc240ade4("perf trace: Support multiple "vfs_getname" probes") > > Signed-off-by: Bo Yu <tsu.yubo@gmail.com> > --- > tools/perf/builtin-trace.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-trace.c b/tools/perf/builtin-trace.c > index b36061cd1ab8..4036b20a1067 100644 > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-trace.c > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-trace.c > @@ -2515,7 +2515,7 @@ static size_t trace__fprintf_thread_summary(struct trace *trace, FILE *fp); > static bool perf_evlist__add_vfs_getname(struct perf_evlist *evlist) > { > bool found = false; > - struct perf_evsel *evsel, *tmp; > + struct perf_evsel *evsel = NULL, *tmp;
hum, I can't see how this change could matter, could you pelase explain?
jirka
> struct parse_events_error err = { .idx = 0, }; > int ret = parse_events(evlist, "probe:vfs_getname*", &err); > > -- > 2.11.0 >
| |