[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141114103733.03ffc40b@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 10:37:33 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 10/23 v4] tracing/uprobes: Do not use return values
of trace_seq_printf()
On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 00:35:15 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com> wrote:
> > for (i = 0; i < tu->tp.nr_args; i++) {
> > struct probe_arg *parg = &tu->tp.args[i];
> >
> > - if (!parg->type->print(s, parg->name, data + parg->offset, entry))
> > - goto partial;
> > + parg->type->print(s, parg->name, data + parg->offset, entry);
>
> In 7/23 you've left loop canceling path, why don't you do same thing here?
While rebasing this series on my latest code, this patch conflicted. I
notice the difference too (just two minutes ago!).
I agree, it should break out still.
Srikar, can I still have your Reviewed-by if I do that?
-- Steve
>
> Thank you,
>
> > }
> >
> > - if (trace_seq_puts(s, "\n"))
> > - return TRACE_TYPE_HANDLED;
> > + trace_seq_puts(s, "\n");
> >
> > -partial:
> > - return TRACE_TYPE_PARTIAL_LINE;
> > + return trace_handle_return(s);
> > }
> >
> > typedef bool (*filter_func_t)(struct uprobe_consumer *self,
>
>
>
--
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