linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tracing: Simplify conditional compilation code in tracing_set

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJncD7S88TnmoYkLnhiHWEH_8V_PfF56ctLA6Z1_joqHOmDTAg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 2 Jun 2022 21:54:27 +0800
From:   sunliming <kelulanainsley@...il.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: Simplify conditional compilation code in tracing_set_tracer()

Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> 于2022年6月2日周四 20:26写道：
>
> On Thu,  2 Jun 2022 10:24:04 +0800
> sunliming <sunliming@...inos.cn> wrote:
>
> > Two conditional compilation directives "#ifdef CONFIG_TRACER_SNAPSHOT"
> > are used consecutively, and no other code in between. Simplify conditional
> > the compilation code and only use one "#ifdef CONFIG_TRACER_SNAPSHOT".
>
> I think you mean CONFIG_TRACER_MAX_TRACE here.
>
> -- Steve
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: sunliming <sunliming@...inos.cn>
> > ---
> >  kernel/trace/trace.c | 2 --
> >  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace.c b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> > index f400800bc910..dc959e339512 100644
> > --- a/kernel/trace/trace.c
> > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> > @@ -6430,9 +6430,7 @@ int tracing_set_tracer(struct trace_array *tr, const char *buf)
> >               synchronize_rcu();
> >               free_snapshot(tr);
> >       }
> > -#endif
> >
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_TRACER_MAX_TRACE
> >       if (t->use_max_tr && !had_max_tr) {
> >               ret = tracing_alloc_snapshot_instance(tr);
> >               if (ret < 0)
>
Yes, you are right. I am sorry about this low-level mistakes.