* David Goulet ([email protected]) wrote:
[...]
> @@ -1475,15 +1486,21 @@ void ust_app_clean_list(void)
>               assert(!ret);
>               call_rcu(&node->head, delete_ust_app_rcu);
>       }
> -     /* Destroy is done only when the ht is empty */
> -     lttng_ht_destroy(ust_app_ht);
>  
> -     cds_lfht_for_each_entry(ust_app_sock_key_map->ht, &iter.iter, node, 
> node) {
> -             ret = lttng_ht_del(ust_app_sock_key_map, &iter);
> +     /* Cleanup socket hash table */
> +     cds_lfht_for_each_entry(ust_app_ht_by_sock->ht, &iter.iter, node, node) 
> {
> +             ret = lttng_ht_del(ust_app_ht_by_sock, &iter);
>               assert(!ret);
>       }
> +
>       /* Destroy is done only when the ht is empty */
> -     lttng_ht_destroy(ust_app_sock_key_map);
> +     lttng_ht_destroy(ust_app_ht);
> +
> +     /*
> +      * Emptying the previous hash table makes sure this table is also ready 
> for
> +      * destruction.
> +      */

The comment above does not match the code anymore.

Mathieu

> +     lttng_ht_destroy(ust_app_ht_by_sock);
>  
>       rcu_read_unlock();
>  }

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

_______________________________________________
lttng-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev

Reply via email to