[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140424115458.GA8882@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 13:54:58 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Anton Arapov <aarapov@...hat.com>,
David Long <dave.long@...aro.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/2] uprobes/tracing: uprobe_perf_open()->uprobe_apply()
fix
On 04/23, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> Egad, this confused the heck out of me. I didn't notice the swap in
> functions and was wondering what you were doing. I didn't realize this
> is what you meant by moving the uprobe_perf_close() up. I was thinking
> you moved the call up or something, not the function itself physically
> in the file.
...
>
> You can add by Acked-by, but next time, please make this into two
> patches. One to do the move, the other to do the change.
OK...
I tried to lessen the number of patches I have ;) But I agree, this simple
fix looks too complicated without preparation which only moves the code.
Let me split it then. Result is the same do I preserved the acks, this is
what I am going to add to my tree.
Thanks!
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