On Thu, 2013-08-01 at 16:08 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 07/03, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <[email protected]>
>
> Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
Thanks!
>
>
> Just a couple of nits in the case you are going to redo this change,
>
> > Modules do with with the module owner set (automated
> > from the VFS layer).
>
> This logic is dead, I think.
>
> > The ftrace buffer instances have a ref count added
> > to the trace_array when the enabled file is opened
>
> This is too.
>
Yeah, the change log needs an update.
> > -static void cleanup_all_probes(void)
> > +static int cleanup_all_probes(void)
> > {
> > struct trace_uprobe *tu;
> > + int ret = 0;
> >
> > mutex_lock(&uprobe_lock);
> > while (!list_empty(&uprobe_list)) {
> > tu = list_entry(uprobe_list.next, struct trace_uprobe, list);
> > - unregister_trace_uprobe(tu);
> > + ret = unregister_trace_uprobe(tu);
> > + if (ret)
> > + break;
> > }
> > mutex_unlock(&uprobe_lock);
> > + return ret;
> > }
>
> Again, it is not clear what exactly we should do and I won't argue
> either way. But note that (with or without this patch) this doesn't
> match kprobe's release_all_trace_probes() which checks (tries to,
> actually) trace_probe_is_enabled() for every probe first. Perhaps
> we should cleanup this later.
Agreed on all accounts. Especially the "we should cleanup this later"
part ;-)
>
> > static int probes_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> > {
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > if ((file->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE) && (file->f_flags & O_TRUNC))
> > - cleanup_all_probes();
> > + ret = cleanup_all_probes();
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
>
> Cosmetic, but perhaps it would be a bit more clean to move this check
> (with "int ret") under if (WRITE && TRUNC) block.
>
Yeah, agreed.
-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
