> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2022 12:05 PM
> To: Sunil Kumar Kori <sk...@marvell.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; sta...@dpdk.org; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
> <jer...@marvell.com>
> Subject: Re: [EXT] [PATCH 3/8] trace: fix leak with regexp
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 1:00 PM Sunil Kumar Kori <sk...@marvell.com>
> wrote:
> > > @@ -210,15 +210,18 @@ rte_trace_regexp(const char *regex, bool
> enable)
> > > return -EINVAL;
> > >
> > > STAILQ_FOREACH(tp, &tp_list, next) {
> > > - if (regexec(&r, tp->name, 0, NULL, 0) == 0) {
> > > - if (enable)
> > > - rc = rte_trace_point_enable(tp->handle);
> > > - else
> > > - rc = rte_trace_point_disable(tp->handle);
> > > - found = 1;
> > > + if (regexec(&r, tp->name, 0, NULL, 0) != 0)
> > > + continue;
> > > +
> > > + if (enable)
> > > + rc = rte_trace_point_enable(tp->handle);
> > > + else
> > > + rc = rte_trace_point_disable(tp->handle);
> > > + if (rc < 0) {
> > > + found = 0;
> > > + break;
> > > }
> > > - if (rc < 0)
> > > - return rc;
> > > + found = 1;
> > > }
> > > regfree(&r);
> > >
> > > --
> >
> > I understand the problem addressed by this fix but may be following
> changes will be sufficient to fix it.
> > Please highlight, If I am missing. Just trying to reduce the line of
> > changes.
> >
> > @@ -220,8 +220,10 @@ rte_trace_regexp(const char *regex, bool enable)
> > rc = rte_trace_point_disable(tp->handle);
> > found = 1;
> > }
> > - if (rc < 0)
> > - return rc;
> > + if (rc < 0) {
> > + found = 0;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > }
>
>
> rc is compared against 0 for all non-matching tracepoints.
> This is unnecessary and fragile.
>
> I can split this change in two: one for the fix, and one other where the loop
> is
> updated with a continue and an inverted matching condition like above.
> If going like this, I would update rte_trace_pattern() too, in the second
> patch.
>
> WDYT?
Sounds okay. You can proceed in either way. No hard opinion on it.
>
>
> --
> David Marchand
