lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCHv2] perf bpf: Fix endianness problem when loading parameters in prologue
From
Date


On 2017/8/15 14:42, Thomas-Mich Richter wrote:
> On 08/14/2017 06:39 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>> Em Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 01:46:44PM +0200, Thomas Richter escreveu:
>>> Perf BPF prologue generator unconditionally fetches 8 bytes for function
>>> parameters, which causes problem on big endian machine. Thomas gives a
>>> detail analysis for this problem:
>>>
>>> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/968ebda5-abe4-8830-8d69-49f62529d151@linux.vnet.ibm.com
>>>
>>> This patch parses the type of each argument and converts data from
>>> memory to expected type.
>>>
>>> Now the test runs successfully on 4.13.0-rc5:
>>> [root@s8360046 perf]# ./perf test bpf
>>> 38: BPF filter :
>>> 38.1: Basic BPF filtering : Ok
>>> 38.2: BPF pinning : Ok
>>> 38.3: BPF prologue generation : Ok
>>> 38.4: BPF relocation checker : Ok
>>> [root@s8360046 perf]#
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Richter <tmricht@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan <wangnan0@huawei.com>
>>> Acked-by: Wang Nan <wangnan0@huawei.com>
>>> Tested-by: Wang Nan <wangnan0@huawei.com>
>>
>> That is strange, who is the author of the patch? Also I think Tested-by
>> is enough, being an even stronger form of Acked-by?
>>
>> But then you also have Signed-off-by: Wang in there...
>>
>> From Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:
>>
>> ---------
>>
>> 12) When to use Acked-by: and Cc:
>> ---------------------------------
>>
>> The Signed-off-by: tag indicates that the signer was involved in the
>> development of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path.
>>
>> If a person was not directly involved in the preparation or handling of a
>> patch but wishes to signify and record their approval of it then they can
>> ask to have an Acked-by: line added to the patch's changelog.
>>
>> Acked-by: is often used by the maintainer of the affected code when that
>> maintainer neither contributed to nor forwarded the patch.
>>
>> ------------------
>>
>> If Wang wrote the original patch and you made it better working together
>> with him, probably having both of you in Signed-off-by lines should be
>> enough?
>>
>> - Arnaldo
>>
> Ok, my fault then.
> Wang wrote to patch in the first place, I just fixed one line.
> Should I resend the patch and delete the Acked-by/Tested-by lines
> in the commit message?

Yes, please resend it.

> Thanks
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-15 10:48    [W:0.045 / U:0.272 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site