Messages in this thread | | | From | Rob Herring <> | Date | Thu, 15 Apr 2021 15:09:28 -0500 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 2/4] libperf: Add evsel mmap support |
| |
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 2:37 PM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> wrote: > > Em Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 04:14:31AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu: > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 3:23 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo > > <acme@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > Em Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 03:02:08PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > > > > Em Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 01:41:35AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 1:07 AM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > +void *perf_evsel__mmap_base(struct perf_evsel *evsel, int cpu, int thread) > > > > > > +{ > > > > > > + if (FD(evsel, cpu, thread) < 0 || MMAP(evsel, cpu, thread) == NULL) > > > > > > + return NULL; > > > > > > > > > > I think you should check the cpu and the thread is in > > > > > a valid range. Currently xyarray__entry() simply accesses > > > > > the content without checking the boundaries. > > > > > > > > So, since xyarray has the bounds, it should check it, i.e. we need to > > > > have a __xyarray__entry() that is what xyarray__entry() does, i.e. > > > > assume the values have been bounds checked, then a new method, > > > > xyarray__entry() that does bounds check, if it fails, return NULL, > > > > otherwise calls __xyarray__entry(). > > > > > > > > I see this is frustrating and I should've chimed in earlier, but at > > > > least now this is getting traction, and the end result will be better > > > > not just for the feature you've been dilligently working on, > > > > > > > > Thank you for your persistence, > > > > > > Re-reading, yeah, this can be done in a separate patch, Namhyung, can I > > > have your Reviewed-by? That or an Acked-by? > > > > Sure, for the series: > > > > Acked-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> > > Ok, b4 failed on it, probably some missing Reply to, so I'll apply it by > hand:
That's my fault. A duplicate message-id is the issue. git-send-email died after patch 1/4 (can't say I've ever had that happen). So in my attempt to manually resend 2-4, I was off by 1 in the message-id and duplicated patch 1's message-id. I should have just resent the whole thing.
Rob
| |