On 27 August 2026 13:08:39 BST, Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote: >On Wed, 26 Aug 2026 21:44:15 +0000 >Jérémy Jean <[email protected]> wrote: >> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c >b/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c >> index 2bbc89d4a266..339e18085af3 100644 >> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c >> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events_user.c >> @@ -865,9 +865,12 @@ void user_event_mm_remove(struct task_struct *t) >> >> void user_event_mm_dup(struct task_struct *t, struct user_event_mm >*old_mm) >> { >> - struct user_event_mm *mm = user_event_mm_alloc(t); >> + struct user_event_mm *mm; > >Why this change? > >> struct user_event_enabler *enabler; >> >> + t->user_event_mm = NULL; >> + mm = user_event_mm_alloc(t); > >I don't see why you moved the mm assignment down here. The >t->user_event_mm >is not used in user_event_mm_alloc().
Uff, not wrong, I must be dummy dumb dumb, well, I base my reviews off Does this fix the bug? And is this a small fix? > >-- Steve > >> + >> if (!mm) >> return; >> > --- Thanks! https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
