On Thu, 21 Aug 2025 02:11:20 +0000
Tengda Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
tested this and was writing the change log for the pull request when I
realized an issue.
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace.c b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> index 4283ed4e8f59..b4cec22753ea 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> @@ -10617,6 +10617,7 @@ static void ftrace_dump_one(struct trace_array *tr,
> enum ftrace_dump_mode dump_m
> */
>
> while (!trace_empty(&iter)) {
> + void *ent;
>
> if (!cnt)
> printk(KERN_TRACE
> "---------------------------------\n");
> @@ -10625,17 +10626,18 @@ static void ftrace_dump_one(struct trace_array *tr,
> enum ftrace_dump_mode dump_m
>
> trace_iterator_reset(&iter);
> iter.iter_flags |= TRACE_FILE_LAT_FMT;
> + ent = trace_find_next_entry_inc(&iter);
>
> - if (trace_find_next_entry_inc(&iter) != NULL) {
> + if (ent) {
Why do we need "ent"?
> int ret;
>
> ret = print_trace_line(&iter);
> if (ret != TRACE_TYPE_NO_CONSUME)
> trace_consume(&iter);
> +
> + trace_printk_seq(&iter.seq);
Isn't just moving trace_printk_seq() enough?
The code is no different with or without the "ent" as "ent" is not used in
the if block.
-- Steve
> }
> touch_nmi_watchdog();
> -
> - trace_printk_seq(&iter.seq);
> }
>
> if (!cnt)
