On Mon, 09 Dec 2013 15:59:26 +0900
Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org> wrote:
> Hi Ilia,
>
> On Mon, 9 Dec 2013 01:28:26 -0500, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org> wrote:
> >> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org>
> >> ---
> >> tools/lib/traceevent/parse-filter.c | 12 +++++++++---
> >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tools/lib/traceevent/parse-filter.c
> >> b/tools/lib/traceevent/parse-filter.c
> >> index 5efe66a682bd..a1ad609a860f 100644
> >> --- a/tools/lib/traceevent/parse-filter.c
> >> +++ b/tools/lib/traceevent/parse-filter.c
> >> @@ -583,12 +583,18 @@ static int add_right(struct filter_arg *op, struct
> >> filter_arg *arg,
> >> op->str.type = op_type;
> >> op->str.field = left->field.field;
> >> op->str.val = strdup(str);
> >> - if (!op->str.val)
> >> - die("malloc string");
> >> + if (!op->str.val) {
> >> + show_error(error_str, "Failed to allocate
> >> string filter");
> >> + return -1;
> >> + }
> >> /*
> >> * Need a buffer to copy data for tests
> >> */
> >> - op->str.buffer = malloc_or_die(op->str.field->size
> >> + 1);
> >> + op->str.buffer = malloc(op->str.field->size + 1);
> >> + if (op->str.buffer) {
> >
> > That should probably be
> >
> > if (!op->str.buffer)
>
> Argh.. you're right!
I was thinking that it was better to do it Namhyung's way, with:
if (op->str.buffer == NULL)
than my preferred way of:
if (!op->str.buffer)
because I thought this mistake is more prevalent with my way. But It's
good to know that this bug happens regardless of which way you
prefer ;-)
-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
