[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20111221123807.707783878@goodmis.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 07:36:33 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH 09/16] ftrace: Fix ftrace hash record update with notrace
From: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
When disabling the "notrace" records, that means we want to trace them.
If the notrace_hash is zero, it means that we want to trace all
records. But to disable a zero notrace_hash means nothing.
The check for the notrace_hash count was incorrect with:
if (hash && !hash->count)
return
With the correct comment above it that states that we do nothing
if the notrace_hash has zero count. But !hash also means that
the notrace hash has zero count. I think this was done to
protect against dereferencing NULL. But if !hash is true, then
we go through the following loop without doing a single thing.
Fix it to:
if (!hash || !hash->count)
return;
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
---
kernel/trace/ftrace.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
index dcd3a81..a383d6c 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
@@ -1381,7 +1381,7 @@ static void __ftrace_hash_rec_update(struct ftrace_ops *ops,
* If the notrace hash has no items,
* then there's nothing to do.
*/
- if (hash && !hash->count)
+ if (!hash || !hash->count)
return;
}
--
1.7.7.3
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists