Re: [PATCH v3] kernel/trace: fixed static warnings

[Abhijith Sriram]

On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 9:18 AM Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon,  6 Apr 2026 08:00:36 +0200
> abhijithsriram95@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > From: Abhijith Sriram <abhijithsriram95@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > The change in the function argument description
> > was due to the static code checker script reading
> > the word filter back to back
> >
> > Changes in v2:
> > - corrected *m = file->private_data to m = file->private_data
> >
> > Changes in v3:
> > - reverted the changes for struct seq_file *m and
> >   added a new empty line instead
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Abhijith Sriram <abhijithsriram95@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  kernel/trace/trace_events_trigger.c | 8 +++++---
> >  new-changes                         | 6 ++++++
> >  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 new-changes
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events_trigger.c b/kernel/trace/trace_events_trigger.c
> > index 655db2e82513..08adb593fcd9 100644
> > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events_trigger.c
> > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events_trigger.c
> > @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ event_triggers_post_call(struct trace_event_file *file,
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(event_triggers_post_call);
> >
> > -#define SHOW_AVAILABLE_TRIGGERS      (void *)(1UL)
> > +#define SHOW_AVAILABLE_TRIGGERS      ((void *)(1UL))
> >
> >  static void *trigger_next(struct seq_file *m, void *t, loff_t *pos)
> >  {
> > @@ -352,6 +352,7 @@ static int event_trigger_regex_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> >               ret = seq_open(file, &event_triggers_seq_ops);
> >               if (!ret) {
> >                       struct seq_file *m = file->private_data;
> > +
> >                       m->private = file;
> >               }
> >       }
> > @@ -388,9 +389,9 @@ static ssize_t event_trigger_regex_write(struct file *file,
> >                                        const char __user *ubuf,
> >                                        size_t cnt, loff_t *ppos)
> >  {
> > +     char *buf __free(kfree) = NULL;
> >       struct trace_event_file *event_file;
> >       ssize_t ret;
> > -     char *buf __free(kfree) = NULL;
>
> Again, this is not OK. Even if checkpatch.pl complained against this,
> there should be no problem. Only if you think this is not sorted by
> length, you can do:
Removed it in the new patch
>
>         struct trace_event_file *event_file;
> +       char *buf __free(kfree) = NULL;
>         ssize_t ret;
> -       char *buf __free(kfree) = NULL;
>
> This change is acceptable as a cosmetic change.
>
> >
> >       if (!cnt)
> >               return 0;
> > @@ -633,6 +634,7 @@ clear_event_triggers(struct trace_array *tr)
> >
> >       list_for_each_entry(file, &tr->events, list) {
> >               struct event_trigger_data *data, *n;
> > +
> >               list_for_each_entry_safe(data, n, &file->triggers, list) {
> >                       trace_event_trigger_enable_disable(file, 0);
> >                       list_del_rcu(&data->list);
> > @@ -785,7 +787,7 @@ static void unregister_trigger(char *glob,
> >   *   cmd               - the trigger command name
> >   *   glob              - the trigger command name optionally prefaced with '!'
> >   *   param_and_filter  - text following cmd and ':'
> > - *   param             - text following cmd and ':' and stripped of filter
> > + *   param             - text following cmd and ':' and filter removed
> >   *   filter            - the optional filter text following (and including) 'if'
> >   *
> >   * To illustrate the use of these components, here are some concrete
> > diff --git a/new-changes b/new-changes
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..9e3a24de3033
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/new-changes
> > @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
> > +Line 25 -> adding const to the pointer address as well.
> > +
> > +linw 1193 -> removing else because there is a return statement in the if condition
> > +line 1727 -> adding new line after statement
> > +line 1800 -> reordering to solve missing a blank line warning
> > +line 12364 -> changed the function to kstrtoul
> > \ No newline at end of file
>
> Is this your working note?
> Please remove it.
Removed it in the new patch
>
> Thank you,
>
> > --
> > 2.43.0
> >
>
>
> --
> Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thank you for your patience. I am still learning and trying to find my hold.
Here is the new patch version:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/20260406072834.243491-2-abhijithsriram95@xxxxxxxxx/T/#u
I will do my best to be more careful in the future :)


-- 
Regards
Abhijith Sriram