Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
pfm parsing for perf stat codes per instruction #33
pfm parsing for perf stat codes per instruction #33
Changes from 1 commit
9f7f103
e5a03fe
2176713
aa3b325
940c8ce
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
💡 Codebase verification
Extra argument needs input validation but shell injection is properly handled
The review comment's security concerns are partially valid, but the shell command execution is actually safe:
extra
parameter is used inperf
command construction through string formatting (as seen instat_cmd
andrecord_cmd
functions)phlop/proc.py
which usessubprocess.run
with proper parameter handlingHowever, input validation is still recommended to ensure only valid perf options are passed. Here's a revised suggestion:
🔗 Analysis chain
Security and validation concerns with the
--extra
argument.Forwarding raw strings to shell commands without validation could pose security risks. Additionally, consider:
Let's check if the extra options are used in shell commands:
Consider applying this diff for better organization and basic validation:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
Length of output: 29
Script:
Length of output: 490
Script:
Length of output: 107
Script:
Length of output: 998
Script:
Length of output: 2030
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add type hints and docstring.
The function lacks proper documentation and type hints. It also assumes the input will always have at least one line and the expected format.
📝 Committable suggestion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Improve path handling and add error handling.
The function uses a hardcoded path and lacks proper error handling for command execution failures.
📝 Committable suggestion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add docstring and improve error handling.
The function should have proper documentation and propagate errors from its dependencies.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Improve error handling and documentation in _parse_evtinfo.
The function has several areas for improvement:
📝 Committable suggestion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
💡 Codebase verification
Security concerns identified with external binary execution
The code attempts to execute a binary
./tpp/pfm/examples/showevtinfo
that:parent.parent.parent
Recommendations:
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify security implications of external command execution.
The code executes an external binary. Please ensure:
Let me gather more information about the binary execution and path handling.
Let me check the actual implementation and context of the binary execution.
Let me check one final aspect about the binary and its source.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
Length of output: 123
Script:
Length of output: 559
Script:
Length of output: 2125
Script:
Length of output: 339
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Improve error handling and configuration in execution functions.
The functions need better error handling and should avoid hard-coded paths.
📝 Committable suggestion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Multiple improvements needed in the event code gathering logic.
key
is unused as flagged by static analysis.📝 Committable suggestion
🧰 Tools
🪛 Ruff
17-17: Loop control variable
key
not used within loop bodyRename unused
key
to_key
(B007)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Improve command execution robustness and configurability.
The command execution could be improved in several ways:
📝 Committable suggestion