linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] trace-cmd: replace show_file() -> show_instance

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170706182935.7a72ed14@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Thu, 6 Jul 2017 18:29:35 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...a.pv.it>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] trace-cmd: replace show_file() ->
 show_instance_file()

On Mon,  5 Jun 2017 11:31:18 +0200
Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...a.pv.it> wrote:

> show_file(name) and show_instance_file(&top_instance, name) are
> equivalent.
> 
> Remove the show_file() function in order to have a single function for
> this task.

Actually I find nothing wrong with having a helper function like this.
IIRC, show_file() was first, and then show_instance_file() came later.
There's some files that only exist for the top_instance, and I like the
fact that this is annotated that way.

I'm curious to know what the benefit of removing show_file() is?

-- Steve


> 
> Signed-off-by: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...a.pv.it>
> ---
>  trace-list.c     | 21 ++++++---------------
>  trace-local.h    |  2 --
>  trace-show.c     | 18 ++----------------
>  trace-snapshot.c |  2 +-
>  4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
\