linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] tracing: Fix compile error in trace

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]

Date:   Wed, 7 Sep 2022 12:27:33 -0700
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:     Arun Easi <aeasi@...vell.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Martin Petersen <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
        James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-next@...r.kernel.org, GR-QLogic-Storage-Upstream@...vell.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] tracing: Fix compile error in trace_array calls
 when TRACING is disabled

On 9/7/22 11:57, Arun Easi wrote:
> +#else	/* CONFIG_TRACING */
> +static inline int register_ftrace_export(struct trace_export *export)
> +{
> +	return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +static inline int unregister_ftrace_export(struct trace_export *export)
> +{
> +	return 0;
> +}

Isn't it recommended to leave a blank line between function definitions?

> +static inline int
> +trace_array_printk(struct trace_array *tr, unsigned long ip,
> +		       const char *fmt, ...)

This is not the recommended way to format a function definition. 
Consider running git clang-format HEAD^.

> +static inline struct trace_array *
> +trace_array_get_by_name(const char *name)

Same comment here.

Thanks,

Bart.