On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 10:06:09 +0800 Wei Yang <[email protected]> wrote:
> The value to be used and compared in trace_search_list() is "last + 1". > Let's just define next to be "last + 1" instead of doing the addition > each time. Yeah, this is a nice clean up. I'll take this one. -- Steve > > Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <[email protected]> > --- > kernel/trace/trace_output.c | 12 ++++++------ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_output.c b/kernel/trace/trace_output.c > index 47bf9f042b97..b704b3ef4264 100644 > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_output.c > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_output.c > @@ -675,11 +675,11 @@ static LIST_HEAD(ftrace_event_list); > static int trace_search_list(struct list_head **list) > { > struct trace_event *e; > - int last = __TRACE_LAST_TYPE; > + int next = __TRACE_LAST_TYPE + 1; > > if (list_empty(&ftrace_event_list)) { > *list = &ftrace_event_list; > - return last + 1; > + return next; > } > > /* > @@ -687,17 +687,17 @@ static int trace_search_list(struct list_head **list) > * lets see if somebody freed one. > */ > list_for_each_entry(e, &ftrace_event_list, list) { > - if (e->type != last + 1) > + if (e->type != next) > break; > - last++; > + next++; > } > > /* Did we used up all 65 thousand events??? */ > - if ((last + 1) > TRACE_EVENT_TYPE_MAX) > + if (next > TRACE_EVENT_TYPE_MAX) > return 0; > > *list = &e->list; > - return last + 1; > + return next; > } > > void trace_event_read_lock(void)
