[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190418203954.631914cb@oasis.local.home>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 20:39:54 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>,
David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch V2 01/29] tracing: Cleanup stack trace code
On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 00:44:17 +0200 (CEST)
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2019, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 10:41:20 +0200
> > Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > > @@ -412,23 +404,20 @@ stack_trace_sysctl(struct ctl_table *tab
> > > void __user *buffer, size_t *lenp,
> > > loff_t *ppos)
> > > {
> > > - int ret;
> > > + int ret, was_enabled;
> >
> > One small nit. Could this be:
> >
> > int was_enabled;
> > int ret;
> >
> > I prefer only joining variables that are related on the same line.
> > Makes it look cleaner IMO.
>
> If you wish so. To me it's waste of screen space :)
At least you didn't say it helps the compiler ;-)
>
> > >
> > > mutex_lock(&stack_sysctl_mutex);
> > > + was_enabled = !!stack_tracer_enabled;
> > >
> >
> > Bah, not sure why I didn't do it this way to begin with. I think I
> > copied something else that couldn't do it this way for some reason and
> > didn't put any brain power behind the copy. :-/ But that was back in
> > 2008 so I blame it on being "young and stupid" ;-)
>
> The young part is gone for sure :)
I purposely set you up for that response.
>
> > Other then the above nit and removing the unneeded +1 in max_entries:
>
> s/+1/-1/
That was an ode to G+
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists