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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 17:18:14 +0200 From: Vladislav Valtchev <vladislav.valtchev@...il.com> To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, y.karadz@...il.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] trace-cmd: Extract parse_record_options() from trace_record() On Wed, 2017-11-29 at 09:53 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 20:17:46 +0200 > Vladislav Valtchev <vladislav.valtchev@...il.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 11:48 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > > Is there a reason that init_instance() isn't called in > > > init_common_record_context()? > > > > > > > Hi Steven, > > > > init_instance() has been put into init_common_record_context() later, > > in patch 8, "Making start,extract,stream,profile separate funcs". > > I have to ask. Why isn't it done in this patch. This patch appears to > be the proper place to put it. > There is no reason, actually. You're absolutely right. It's a leftover from several iterations of fixes (originally 'instance' was not part of ctx). Therefore, I'll move that call to init_instance() inside init_common_record_context(). Vlad
Powered by blists - more mailing lists