Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

2018-02-06 2:48 GMT+00:00 Steven Rostedt : > On Tue, 6 Feb 2018 02:44:03 + > Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Yes, I've planned to do this.. >> As it's merge-window now I thought doing this a week later. >> So, it's up to you - just let me know so we

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

2018-02-06 2:48 GMT+00:00 Steven Rostedt : > On Tue, 6 Feb 2018 02:44:03 + > Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Yes, I've planned to do this.. >> As it's merge-window now I thought doing this a week later. >> So, it's up to you - just let me know so we will not end doing the

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Tue, 6 Feb 2018 02:44:03 + Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, I've planned to do this.. > As it's merge-window now I thought doing this a week later. > So, it's up to you - just let me know so we will not end doing the same fix :) > If you haven't done it already, I'll

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Tue, 6 Feb 2018 02:44:03 + Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, I've planned to do this.. > As it's merge-window now I thought doing this a week later. > So, it's up to you - just let me know so we will not end doing the same fix :) > If you haven't done it already, I'll

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

2018-02-06 2:40 GMT+00:00 Steven Rostedt : > On Tue, 6 Feb 2018 11:26:14 +0900 > Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >> No, that code looks good to me. :) >> >> BTW, did you also remove "search = buff;" line in >> unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func() too? > >

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

2018-02-06 2:40 GMT+00:00 Steven Rostedt : > On Tue, 6 Feb 2018 11:26:14 +0900 > Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >> No, that code looks good to me. :) >> >> BTW, did you also remove "search = buff;" line in >> unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func() too? > > That's a separate bug, and should be a

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Tue, 6 Feb 2018 11:26:14 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > No, that code looks good to me. :) > > BTW, did you also remove "search = buff;" line in > unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func() too? That's a separate bug, and should be a separate patch. Dmitry mentioned that

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Tue, 6 Feb 2018 11:26:14 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > No, that code looks good to me. :) > > BTW, did you also remove "search = buff;" line in > unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func() too? That's a separate bug, and should be a separate patch. Dmitry mentioned that he was preparing a

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Mon, 5 Feb 2018 17:54:33 -0500 Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 22:59:42 +0900 > Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:07:48 + > > Al Viro wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Mon, 5 Feb 2018 17:54:33 -0500 Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 22:59:42 +0900 > Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:07:48 + > > Al Viro wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM +, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > > > > > > > Incidentally,

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

2018-02-05 22:54 GMT+00:00 Steven Rostedt : > On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 22:59:42 +0900 > Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >> On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:07:48 + >> Al Viro wrote: >> >> > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM +, Dmitry Safonov

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

2018-02-05 22:54 GMT+00:00 Steven Rostedt : > On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 22:59:42 +0900 > Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >> On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:07:48 + >> Al Viro wrote: >> >> > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM +, Dmitry Safonov wrote: >> > > >> > > > Incidentally, shouldn't

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 22:59:42 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:07:48 + > Al Viro wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM +, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > > > > > Incidentally, shouldn't

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 22:59:42 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:07:48 + > Al Viro wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM +, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > > > > > Incidentally, shouldn't filter_parse_regex("*[ab]", 5, , ) > > > > end up with s = "*[ab]"?

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:07:48 + Al Viro wrote: > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM +, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > > > Incidentally, shouldn't filter_parse_regex("*[ab]", 5, , ) > > > end up with s = "*[ab]"? We are returning MATCH_GLOB, after all, > > > so we

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:07:48 + Al Viro wrote: > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM +, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > > > Incidentally, shouldn't filter_parse_regex("*[ab]", 5, , ) > > > end up with s = "*[ab]"? We are returning MATCH_GLOB, after all, > > > so we want the entire pattern

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 03:17:06 + Al Viro wrote: > It contains something very odd: > > func_g.type = filter_parse_regex(glob, strlen(glob), > _g.search, ); > func_g.len =

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 03:17:06 + Al Viro wrote: > It contains something very odd: > > func_g.type = filter_parse_regex(glob, strlen(glob), > _g.search, ); > func_g.len = strlen(func_g.search); >

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:07:48 + Al Viro wrote: Hi Al, > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM +, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > > > Incidentally, shouldn't filter_parse_regex("*[ab]", 5, , ) > > > end up with s = "*[ab]"? We are returning MATCH_GLOB, after all, > >

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 17:07:48 + Al Viro wrote: Hi Al, > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM +, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > > > Incidentally, shouldn't filter_parse_regex("*[ab]", 5, , ) > > > end up with s = "*[ab]"? We are returning MATCH_GLOB, after all, > > > so we want the entire

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM +, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > Incidentally, shouldn't filter_parse_regex("*[ab]", 5, , ) > > end up with s = "*[ab]"? We are returning MATCH_GLOB, after all, > > so we want the entire pattern there... I would've assumed that > > this is what the code in

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 01:59:56PM +, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > Incidentally, shouldn't filter_parse_regex("*[ab]", 5, , ) > > end up with s = "*[ab]"? We are returning MATCH_GLOB, after all, > > so we want the entire pattern there... I would've assumed that > > this is what the code in

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

Hi Alexander, 2018-01-27 3:17 GMT+00:00 Al Viro : > It contains something very odd: > > func_g.type = filter_parse_regex(glob, strlen(glob), > _g.search, ); > func_g.len =

Re: [RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

Hi Alexander, 2018-01-27 3:17 GMT+00:00 Al Viro : > It contains something very odd: > > func_g.type = filter_parse_regex(glob, strlen(glob), > _g.search, ); > func_g.len = strlen(func_g.search); >

[RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

It contains something very odd: func_g.type = filter_parse_regex(glob, strlen(glob), _g.search, ); func_g.len = strlen(func_g.search); func_g.search = glob; /* we do not support '!'

[RFC] apparent bogosity in unregister_ftrace_function_probe_func()

It contains something very odd: func_g.type = filter_parse_regex(glob, strlen(glob), _g.search, ); func_g.len = strlen(func_g.search); func_g.search = glob; /* we do not support '!'