Re: [PATCH] tracing/kprobes: Simplify the logic of enable_trace_kprobe()

[Steven Rostedt]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 11:43:52 -0500
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 12:11:52PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > 
> > [ Note this is applied on top of the other patch to quiet gcc ]
> > 
> > From: "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > The function enable_trace_kprobe() performs slightly differently if the file
> > parameter is passed in as NULL on non-NULL. Instead of checking file twice,
> > move the code between the two tests into a static inline helper function to
> > make the code easier to follow.
> > 
> > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180725224728.7b1d5db2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>  
> 
> The enable_probe() name is a bit confusing, since it's not clear what
> the difference is between enable_probe() and enable_trace_kprobe()
> without looking at the code.

Yeah, I didn't like that name either.

> 
> Maybe call it __enable_trace_kprobe()?

Hmm, that may work.

> 
> Otherwise it's a definite improvement.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 

Thanks,

-- Steve