From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754093AbaBUCx6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Feb 2014 21:53:58 -0500 Received: from cdptpa-outbound-snat.email.rr.com ([107.14.166.226]:23969 "EHLO cdptpa-oedge-vip.email.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753221AbaBUCuF (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Feb 2014 21:50:05 -0500 Message-Id: <20140221025002.829581354@goodmis.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.61-1 Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 21:49:18 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Ingo Molnar , Frederic Weisbecker , Andrew Morton , Namhyung Kim , Masami Hiramatsu , Oleg Nesterov , Srikar Dronamraju Subject: [for-next][PATCH 12/18] tracing/uprobes: Rename uprobe_{trace,perf}_print() functions References: <20140221024906.901631810@goodmis.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Disposition: inline; filename=0012-tracing-uprobes-Rename-uprobe_-trace-perf-_print-fun.patch X-RR-Connecting-IP: 107.14.168.118:25 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Namhyung Kim The uprobe_{trace,perf}_print functions are misnomers since what they do is not printing. There's also a real print function named print_uprobe_event() so they'll only increase confusion IMHO. Rename them with double underscores to follow convention of kprobe. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1389946120-19610-2-git-send-email-namhyung@kernel.org Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu Cc: Frederic Weisbecker Cc: Ingo Molnar Cc: Oleg Nesterov Cc: Srikar Dronamraju Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt --- kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c index 79e52d9..c5d2612 100644 --- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c @@ -758,7 +758,7 @@ static void uprobe_buffer_put(struct uprobe_cpu_buffer *ucb) mutex_unlock(&ucb->mutex); } -static void uprobe_trace_print(struct trace_uprobe *tu, +static void __uprobe_trace_func(struct trace_uprobe *tu, unsigned long func, struct pt_regs *regs) { struct uprobe_trace_entry_head *entry; @@ -807,14 +807,14 @@ out: static int uprobe_trace_func(struct trace_uprobe *tu, struct pt_regs *regs) { if (!is_ret_probe(tu)) - uprobe_trace_print(tu, 0, regs); + __uprobe_trace_func(tu, 0, regs); return 0; } static void uretprobe_trace_func(struct trace_uprobe *tu, unsigned long func, struct pt_regs *regs) { - uprobe_trace_print(tu, func, regs); + __uprobe_trace_func(tu, func, regs); } /* Event entry printers */ @@ -1014,7 +1014,7 @@ static bool uprobe_perf_filter(struct uprobe_consumer *uc, return ret; } -static void uprobe_perf_print(struct trace_uprobe *tu, +static void __uprobe_perf_func(struct trace_uprobe *tu, unsigned long func, struct pt_regs *regs) { struct ftrace_event_call *call = &tu->tp.call; @@ -1078,14 +1078,14 @@ static int uprobe_perf_func(struct trace_uprobe *tu, struct pt_regs *regs) return UPROBE_HANDLER_REMOVE; if (!is_ret_probe(tu)) - uprobe_perf_print(tu, 0, regs); + __uprobe_perf_func(tu, 0, regs); return 0; } static void uretprobe_perf_func(struct trace_uprobe *tu, unsigned long func, struct pt_regs *regs) { - uprobe_perf_print(tu, func, regs); + __uprobe_perf_func(tu, func, regs); } #endif /* CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS */ -- 1.8.5.3