Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753438AbdHOIr7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Aug 2017 04:47:59 -0400 Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191]:3100 "EHLO szxga05-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751617AbdHOIr4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Aug 2017 04:47:56 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] perf bpf: Fix endianness problem when loading parameters in prologue To: Thomas-Mich Richter , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo References: <20170814114644.82526-1-tmricht@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170814163915.GB4114@kernel.org> <54005fd5-de74-e34e-5ea7-86aab759a63d@linux.vnet.ibm.com> CC: , , From: "Wangnan (F)" Message-ID: <0b2679cb-640f-35ec-be7c-bf13f4225173@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 16:47:26 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <54005fd5-de74-e34e-5ea7-86aab759a63d@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.111.194.139] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020204.5992B52E.0067,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2014-11-16 11:51:01, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32 X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: a9f4216e3d28679bd3f3880e5dae801c Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2455 Lines: 68 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 >>> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan >>> Acked-by: Wang Nan >>> Tested-by: Wang Nan >> >> 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 >