On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 6:00 AM zhangmingyi <zhangmingyi5@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 06/06,Stanislav Fomichev wrote: > > > On 06/05, Xin Liu wrote: > > > From: zhangmingyi <zhangmingyi5@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > The sample_cb of the ring_buffer__new interface can transfer NULL. However, > > > the system does not check whether sample_cb is NULL during > > > ring_buffer__poll, null pointer is used. > > > What is the point of calling ring_buffer__new with sample_cb == NULL? > > Yes, as you said, passing sample_cb in ring_buffer__new to NULL doesn't > make sense, and few people use it that way, but that doesn't prevent this > from being a allowed and supported scenario. And when ring_buffer__poll is > called, it leads to a segmentation fault (core dump), which I think needs > to be fixed to ensure the security quality of libbpf. I dunno. I'd argue that passing a NULL to ring_buffer__new is an API misuse. Maybe ring_buffer__new should return -EINVAL instead when passed NULL sample_cb? Although, we don't usually have those checks for the majority of the arguments in libbpf...
