Re: [PATCH 3/5] perf dso: Use stored fd error instead of stale errno in file_read() and file_size()
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-perf-users,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <an3QHqKMwtO8ijw5@x1> |
On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 11:25:54AM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: > On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 04:12:52PM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 10:52 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email protected]> > > > > > > file_read() and file_size() use ret = -errno when > > > dso__data(dso)->fd is negative after try_to_open_dso() fails. By this > > > point errno has been through mutex_lock(), nsinfo__mountns_enter(), and > > > multiple open() attempts inside try_to_open_dso() — it no longer > > > reflects the actual open failure. If errno happens to be 0, ret = 0 > > > looks like EOF rather than an error, and file_size() callers like > > > dso__data_size() would then report a zero-sized file instead of > > > failing. > > > > > > dso__data(dso)->fd is always negative on failure — -errno from > > > __open_dso() when no filename could be built (e.g. -EINVAL, -ENOENT), > > > or -1 when do_open() itself failed — and never 0, so use it directly > > > instead of reading the stale global errno. > > > > > > Fixes: 33bdedcea2d7 ("perf tools: Protect dso cache fd with a mutex") > > > Reported-by: sashiko-bot <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Namhyung Kim <[email protected]> > > > Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4.6 > > > Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > tools/perf/util/dso.c | 6 ++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/dso.c b/tools/perf/util/dso.c > > > index 124193453675ca18..32ae5c78cdb906e6 100644 > > > --- a/tools/perf/util/dso.c > > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/dso.c > > > @@ -1029,7 +1029,8 @@ static ssize_t file_read(struct dso *dso, struct machine *machine, > > > > > > if (dso__data(dso)->fd < 0) { > > > dso__data(dso)->status = DSO_DATA_STATUS_ERROR; > > > - ret = -errno; > > > + /* fd is always negative here: -errno or -1, never 0 */ > > > + ret = dso__data(dso)->fd; > > > > nit: we can "assert(ret < 0);" to verify the comment. > > It's already checked in the above if statement. I'm not sure the > comment or assert is necessary. You're right, I'm dropping both the comment and the assert, my bad. - Arnaldo