Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210630003406.4013668-1-paulburton@google.com>
 <CAJWu+ooRQ6hFtaA4tr3BNs9Btss1yan8taua=VMWMopGmEVhSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <YN38D3dg0fLzL0Ia@google.com> <20210701140754.5847a50f@oasis.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <20210701140754.5847a50f@oasis.local.home>
From:   Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 1 Jul 2021 14:09:12 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJWu+optxZYJ=RdmconCGMHQRgJqv=0k6NKAzEWui1smXieToA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tracing: Simplify & fix saved_tgids logic
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc:     Paul Burton <paulburton@google.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, stable@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 2:07 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 10:31:59 -0700
> Paul Burton <paulburton@google.com> wrote:
>
> > I was tempted to just add the redundant checks anyway (pick your battles
> > and all) but for show() in particular it wound up making things seem
> > non-sensical to me ("display the value describing this non-NULL pointer
> > into tgid_map only if tgid_map is not NULL?").
>
> I agree with your assessment, and will actually take your first patch,
> as I don't think the comment is that helpful, not to mention, we don't
> use '//' comments in the kernel, so that would have to be changed.
>
> But for cases like this, I usually have something like:
>
>
>         if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!tgid_map))
>                 return -1;
>
> Because the logic is what makes tgid_map not being NULL, but as
> experience has taught me, the logic can sometimes be mistaken, at least
> as time goes by. And things that are protected by logic, deserve a
> WARN*() when it doesn't go as planned.
>
> We can always add that later, if needed.

Agreed, was thinking similar/same.

thanks,

-Joel