On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 09:38:48AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 13:08:28 +0100 > Vincent Donnefort <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > + rb_desc = __next_ring_buffer_desc(rb_desc); > > > > > > Is there no check to make sure that the cpu mask matches what the rb_desc > > > will have? > > > > The function is filling rb_desc[], based on the cpumask input, so both will > > match when returning from this function. > > It is then easy to handle the case where some CPUs are not part of the > > cpumask. > > See remote_test_load() where for_each_ring_buffer_desc() iterates over all > > the > > CPUs from the trace_desc but uses rb_desc->cpu. > > > > Is it what you meant? > > I'm more worried about the allocation not being big enough for the rb_desc > being filled. I just noticed that the trace_remote_register() function is > missing a kerneldoc header. Please add one and specify what the parameters > are for as well as their requirements. > > It's fine to state that the allocation of desc must match what the cpumask > is. But the lack of comments about what the function does and what is > expected of the parameters makes it hard to know if it is performing > properly.
Ok, will do! I could also add a desc_size parameter to make sure we won't overflow the given desc? > > -- Steve
