Re: [PATCH 1/2] tracing/kprobes: move free_trace_probe into unregister_trace_probe

[Jovi Zhang]

On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 18:37 +0800, zhangwei(Jovi) wrote:
>> On 2013/6/25 18:10, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> > (2013/06/25 17:15), zhangwei(Jovi) wrote:
>> >> There have no good reason to call free_trace_probe
>> >> every time when unregister_trace_probe return 0.
>> >>
>> >> Move free_trace_probe into unregister_trace_probe,
>> >> make code simpler.
>> >
>> > Sorry, nack. For the symmetrical coding reason, I don't like
>> > involving "free" and "alloc" into "unregister"/"register"
>> > functions. I think those should be just another actions.
>> >
>> > Thank you,
>>
>> That's fine, I just saw there have a little inconsistent between
>> trace_kprobe.c and trace_uprobe.c.
>>
>
> Is there a place that trace_kprobe.c frees the tp structure in
> unregister?
>

I won't argue put the free operation into unregister function in
trace_kprobe.c, as I said, one minor problem is the code
pattern between trace_kprobe.c and trace_uprobe.c is so
similar on unregister, but with little inconsistent, maybe
we can unify those code in trace_probe.c someday.

Anyway, this is not big functionality issue,  free to leave in there
if authors don't argue.

jovi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/