On Thu, 18 Apr 2019, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 10:41:20 +0200 > Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > @@ -412,23 +404,20 @@ stack_trace_sysctl(struct ctl_table *tab > > void __user *buffer, size_t *lenp, > > loff_t *ppos) > > { > > - int ret; > > + int ret, was_enabled; > > One small nit. Could this be: > > int was_enabled; > int ret; > > I prefer only joining variables that are related on the same line. > Makes it look cleaner IMO. If you wish so. To me it's waste of screen space :) > > > > mutex_lock(&stack_sysctl_mutex); > > + was_enabled = !!stack_tracer_enabled; > > > > Bah, not sure why I didn't do it this way to begin with. I think I > copied something else that couldn't do it this way for some reason and > didn't put any brain power behind the copy. :-/ But that was back in > 2008 so I blame it on being "young and stupid" ;-) The young part is gone for sure :) > Other then the above nit and removing the unneeded +1 in max_entries: s/+1/-1/ Thanks, tglx