lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jun]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [BUGFIX][PATCH v6 2/9] perf config: If collect_config() is failed, finally free a config set after it is done
From
Date


On 06/07/2016 06:37 AM, Taeung Song wrote:
>
>
> On 06/07/2016 05:23 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>> Em Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 07:52:53PM +0900, Taeung Song escreveu:
>>> Because of die() at perf_parse_file() a config set was freed
>>> in collect_config(), if failed.
>>> But it is natural to free a config set after collect_config() is done
>>> when some problems happened.
>>>
>>> So, in case of failure, lastly free a config set at
>>> perf_config_set__new()
>>> instead of freeing the config set in collect_config().
>>>
>>> Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
>>> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
>>> Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
>>> Cc: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Taeung Song <treeze.taeung@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> tools/perf/util/config.c | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/config.c b/tools/perf/util/config.c
>>> index b500737..d013f90 100644
>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/config.c
>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/config.c
>>> @@ -639,7 +639,6 @@ static int collect_config(const char *var, const
>>> char *value,
>>>
>>> out_free:
>>> free(key);
>>> - perf_config_set__delete(set);
>>> return -1;
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -649,7 +648,8 @@ struct perf_config_set *perf_config_set__new(void)
>>>
>>> if (set) {
>>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&set->sections);
>>> - perf_config(collect_config, set);
>>> + if (perf_config(collect_config, set) < 0)
>>> + perf_config_set__delete(set);
>>> }
>>>
>>> return set;
>>
>> You can't do that, there is something missing, without looking at the
>> code I think you need:
>>
>> if (set) {
>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&set->sections);
>> - perf_config(collect_config, set);
>> + if (perf_config(collect_config, set) < 0) {
>> + perf_config_set__delete(set);
>> + set = NULL;
>> + }
>> }
>>
>> return set;
>>
>> No?
>>
>
> Granted
> Sorry for missing above..
>
> I modified using 'return NULL;' instead of 'set = NULL;' as below
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/config.c b/tools/perf/util/config.c
> index c73f1c4..cb749d3 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/config.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/config.c
> @@ -643,7 +643,6 @@ static int collect_config(const char *var, const
> char *value,
>
> out_free:
> free(key);
> - perf_config_set__delete(set);
> return -1;
> }
>
> @@ -653,7 +652,10 @@ struct perf_config_set *perf_config_set__new(void)
>
> if (set) {
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&set->sections);
> - perf_config(collect_config, set);
> + if (perf_config(collect_config, set) < 0) {
> + perf_config_set__delete(set);
> + return NULL;
> + }
> }
>
> return set;
>
> Because in near future, perf_config_set__delete() will use zfree().
>
> will send changed this patch soon !
> Thank you for your review :)
>

Hum.. my answer was stupid.
There isn't difference between 'return NULL;' and 'set = NULL;'
as a result at perf_config_set__new().
And zfree() at perf_config_set__delete() aren't related to this situation..

Anyway.. I'll send v7 with changed this patch as you said!!

Thanks,
Taeung

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-06-07 10:01    [W:0.080 / U:0.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site