I need to read this (hopefully final) version carefully. I'll try to do
this before next Monday.
just one note,
On 08/09, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
>
> +static void delayed_uprobe_remove(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct mm_struct *mm)
> +{
> + struct list_head *pos, *q;
> + struct delayed_uprobe *du;
> +
> + if (!uprobe && !mm)
> + return;
> +
> + list_for_each_safe(pos, q, &delayed_uprobe_list) {
> + du = list_entry(pos, struct delayed_uprobe, list);
> +
> + if (uprobe && mm && du->uprobe == uprobe && du->mm == mm)
> + delayed_uprobe_delete(du);
> + else if (!uprobe && du->mm == mm)
> + delayed_uprobe_delete(du);
> + else if (!mm && du->uprobe == uprobe)
> + delayed_uprobe_delete(du);
> + }
Sorry, I can't resist... this doesn't look very nice. How about
list_for_each_safe(pos, q, &delayed_uprobe_list) {
du = list_entry(pos, struct delayed_uprobe, list);
if (uprobe && du->uprobe != uprobe)
continue;
if (mm && du->mm != mm)
continue;
delayed_uprobe_delete();
}
I won't insist, this is cosmetic after all, but please consider this change
in case you will need to send v9.
Oleg.
