Message-ID: <4A3EE791.5000507@windriver.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:08:17 +0800
From: Wang Liming <liming.wang@windriver.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
CC: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] tracing_bprintk: don't increment @pos in t_start()
References: <4A3B3372.4040608@cn.fujitsu.com> <4A3B3445.2050005@cn.fujitsu.com> <4A3B5CD7.3050601@windriver.com> <4A3ED2A1.40300@cn.fujitsu.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A3ED2A1.40300@cn.fujitsu.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2252
Lines: 71

Li Zefan wrote:
> Wang Liming wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Li Zefan wrote:
>>> It's wrong to increment @pos in t_start(), otherwise we'll lose
>>> some entries when reading printk_formats, if the output is large
>>> than PAGE_SIZE.
>>>
>>> [ Impact: fix missing entries when reading printk_formats ]
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
>>> ---
>>>  kernel/trace/trace_printk.c |   26 ++++++--------------------
>>>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_printk.c b/kernel/trace/trace_printk.c
>>> index 9bece96..7b62781 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_printk.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_printk.c
>>> @@ -155,25 +155,19 @@ int __ftrace_vprintk(unsigned long ip, const
>>> char *fmt, va_list ap)
>>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__ftrace_vprintk);
>>>  
>>>  static void *
>>> -t_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
>>> +t_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos)
>>>  {
>>> -    const char **fmt = m->private;
>>> -    const char **next = fmt;
>>> -
>>> -    (*pos)++;
>>> +    const char **fmt = __start___trace_bprintk_fmt + *pos;
>>>  
>>>      if ((unsigned long)fmt >= (unsigned long)__stop___trace_bprintk_fmt)
>>>          return NULL;
>>> -
>>> -    next = fmt;
>>> -    m->private = ++next;
>>> -
>>>      return fmt;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> -static void *t_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos)
>>> +static void *t_next(struct seq_file *m, void * v, loff_t *pos)
>>>  {
>>> -    return t_next(m, NULL, pos);
>>> +    (*pos)++;
>>> +    return t_start(m, pos);
>>>  }
>>>  
>> I prefer to .start to call .next, so I rewrite it to following:
>>
> 
> Thanks for the comment, but I don't think .next calls .start is bad,
> and I'm not the only one doing this. Grep c_start() to see some of
> them.
Yes, you are not the only one, but it's the only one in the tracing code. :)
I just think we should make the seq_* uniform so that we can understand them 
more clearly.

Liming Wang
> 
> 

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