[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1372167296.18733.195.camel@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 09:34:56 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "zhangwei(Jovi)" <jovi.zhangwei@...wei.com>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com" <yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tracing/kprobes: move free_trace_probe into
unregister_trace_probe
On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 18:37 +0800, zhangwei(Jovi) wrote:
> On 2013/6/25 18:10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > (2013/06/25 17:15), zhangwei(Jovi) wrote:
> >> There have no good reason to call free_trace_probe
> >> every time when unregister_trace_probe return 0.
> >>
> >> Move free_trace_probe into unregister_trace_probe,
> >> make code simpler.
> >
> > Sorry, nack. For the symmetrical coding reason, I don't like
> > involving "free" and "alloc" into "unregister"/"register"
> > functions. I think those should be just another actions.
> >
> > Thank you,
>
> That's fine, I just saw there have a little inconsistent between
> trace_kprobe.c and trace_uprobe.c.
>
Is there a place that trace_kprobe.c frees the tp structure in
unregister?
-- Steve
--
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