On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 08:34:17 -0500
Tom Zanussi <tom.zanu...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> @@ -1577,6 +1577,7 @@ static void event_remove(struct ftrace_event_call *call)
> if (file->event_call != call)
> continue;
> ftrace_event_enable_disable(file, 0);
> + destroy_preds(file);
> /*
> * The do_for_each_event_file() is
> * a double loop. After finding the call for this
> @@ -1700,7 +1701,7 @@ static void __trace_remove_event_call(struct
> ftrace_event_call *call)
> {
> event_remove(call);
> trace_destroy_fields(call);
> - destroy_preds(call);
> + destroy_call_preds(call);
A small nit, but I don't believe we need this anymore.
First, what event that requires a call filter can be removed?
Second, if one could be removed, the previous call to "event_remove"
would remove the filter for us, as destroy_preds(file) calls
destroy_call_preds() if the USE_CALL_FILTER flag is set.
I'll keep it in for now, but may remove it later.
-- Steve
> }
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
