On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 06:13:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: >On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 10:06:12 +0800 >Wei Yang <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Currently we have following call flow: >> >> tracer_init_tracefs() >> tracing_init_dentry() >> event_trace_init() >> tracing_init_dentry() >> >> This shows tracing_init_dentry() is called twice in this flow and this >> is not necessary. > >There's no reason to have patch 4 and 5 separate. Fold the two together. >
Yep, if you think there is no need. Do you want me to send v2 based on you comments? >If you want, you can create another patch that changes >tracing_init_dentry() to return a integer, as you point out, it never >returns an actual dentry. No reason for having it return a pointer then. > >-- Steve > > >> >> Let's remove the second one when it is for sure be properly initialized. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <[email protected]> >> --- >> kernel/trace/trace_events.c | 5 ----- >> 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c >> index 8b3aa57dcea6..76879b29cf33 100644 >> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c >> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c >> @@ -3434,7 +3434,6 @@ early_initcall(event_trace_enable_again); >> __init int event_trace_init(void) >> { >> struct trace_array *tr; >> - struct dentry *d_tracer; >> struct dentry *entry; >> int ret; >> >> @@ -3442,10 +3441,6 @@ __init int event_trace_init(void) >> if (!tr) >> return -ENODEV; >> >> - d_tracer = tracing_init_dentry(); >> - if (IS_ERR(d_tracer)) >> - return 0; >> - >> entry = tracefs_create_file("available_events", 0444, NULL, >> tr, &ftrace_avail_fops); >> if (!entry) -- Wei Yang Help you, Help me
