[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110105004903.GF2911@nowhere>
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 01:49:06 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Zhaolei <zhaolei@...fujitsu.com>,
"nhorman@...driver.com" <nhorman@...driver.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC patch 2/5] trace event skb fix unassigned field
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 07:40:38PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Frederic Weisbecker (fweisbec@...il.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 06:46:06PM -0500, nhorman@...driver.com wrote:
> > > Acked- by: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone
> > >
> > > ----- Reply message -----
> > > From: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
> > > Date: Tue, Jan 4, 2011 6:16 pm
> > > Subject: [RFC patch 2/5] trace event skb fix unassigned field
> > > To: "LKML" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
> > > Cc: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>, "Frederic Weisbecker" <fweisbec@...il.com>, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, "Neil Horman" <nhorman@...driver.com>, "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>
> > >
> > >
> > > The field "protocol" in event kfree_skb is left unassigned if skb is NULL,
> > > leaving its trace output as garbage. Assign the value to 0 when skb is NULL
> > > instead.
> >
> > Hm, if the skb is already null, we probably shouldn't send any trace.
> >
> > What about using TP_CONDITION() ?
>
> Hrm, let's see. It's been introduced by commit
> 5cb3d1d9d34ac04bcaa2034139345b2a5fea54c1
> by Zhaolei.
>
> Event at the time of that commit, the only caller looked like:
>
> void kfree_skb(struct sk_buff *skb)
> {
> if (unlikely(!skb))
> return;
> if (likely(atomic_read(&skb->users) == 1))
> smp_rmb();
> else if (likely(!atomic_dec_and_test(&skb->users)))
> return;
> trace_kfree_skb(skb, __builtin_return_address(0));
> __kfree_skb(skb);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(kfree_skb);
>
> So it already checks for a null pointer before calling the tracepoint. This
> leads me to wonder why why this check was added in the first place ?
Likely for no strong reasons :)
So I guess we can remove the check from the tracepoint?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists