Re: [GIT PULL] tracing: Updates for 5.16

[Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>]

On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 09:17:22 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 20:08:30 -0700
> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 2:55 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Also, this pull request will conflict with your tree against a fix I had
> > > for trace recursions. I did the conflict resolution and pushed it to my
> > > ftrace/conflicts branch if you want to reference it.  
> > 
> > In the meantime, my tree had grown a few more conflicts elsewhere, but
> > it all looked fairly straightforward.
> > 
> > It might be a good idea if you were to double-check that everything
> > looks good, though.
> >
> 
> I performed the merge and conflict resolution to the same commit you used,
> and came up with pretty much the same (sans whitespace differences).
> 
> The only thing I would like to bring attention to is the wording for the
> comment to kprobe_flush_task() that both Thomas and Masami updated, and I
> want to make sure they are both happy with the final result:
> 
> Thomas, Masami ?
> 
> /*
>  * This function is called from delayed_put_task_struct() when a task is
>  * dead and cleaned up to recycle any kretprobe instances associated with
>  * this task. These left over instances represent probed functions that
>  * have been called but will never return.
>  */
> void kprobe_flush_task(struct task_struct *tk)
> 
> You OK with the above wording?

Yes, this looks good to me :-)
Thank you for merging nicely!

-- 
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>