[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140424083753.427bd54b@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 08:37:53 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
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: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] uprobes/tracing:
uprobe_perf_open()->uprobe_apply() fix
On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 13:54:58 +0200
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> 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.
Yeah, sometimes a simple fix just seems wrong to break into two. But if
it helps in code review, it's definitely worth it.
>
> 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.
They look good (and much easier to review).
-- 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