[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131019124312.GA23872@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 14:43:12 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: "Geyslan G. Bem" <geyslan@...il.com>, kernel-br@...glegroups.com,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: fix referencing after memory freeing and
refactors code
On 10/17, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 22:44:56 -0300
> "Geyslan G. Bem" <geyslan@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > and fix the possible 'dir'
> > assignment after freeing it.
This should be safe afaics, nobody will use it anyway. Even
subsystem_release() won't be called if .open() fails. But I agree
this doesn't look good.
> I'm thinking of just nuking the tracing_open_generic() here. The only
> thing it does here is the tracing_disabled check. The assignment of
> inode->i_private to filp->private_data is pointless
The same for ftrace_enable_fops() and ftrace_event_filter_fops() at
least. The users of event_file_data() do not use ->private_data.
OTOH, say, trace_format_open() doesn't check tracing_disabled, so
> We could add a tracing_is_disabled() function to test instead.
perhaps it can have more callers.
Oleg.
--
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