fche changed the topic of #systemtap to: http://sourceware.org/systemtap; email systemtap@sourceware.org if answers here not timely, conversations may be logged
<fche>
agentzh, that first patch looks okay; consider defined(CONFIG_UTRACE) || defined(HAVE_TASK_FINDER) unless you can show the latter implies the former
khaled has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej_ has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
orivej_ has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
zzhm has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
zzhm has joined #systemtap
<agentzh>
fche: _stp_vma_init only checks HAVE_TASK_FINDER, so for symmetric, _stp_vma_done should check it only too?
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
<agentzh>
fche: i've just checked the code, and HAVE_TASK_FINDER implies (defined(CONFIG_UTRACE) || defined(STAPCONF_UTRACE_VIA_TRACEPOINTS)). so it looks good, right?
<agentzh>
what about the 2nd patch?
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
orivej_ has joined #systemtap
orivej_ has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
Guest47672 has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
orivej has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
orivej has joined #systemtap
zzhm has quit [Quit: Leaving]
orivej has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
<agentzh>
fche: i just ran a lot of tests on centos 6 with CONFIG_UTRACE=y defined and -DDEBUG_MEM found no memory leaks so my first patch above should be good.
orivej has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
khaled has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
hpt has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
orivej_ has joined #systemtap
orivej_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
<fche>
agentzh, ok, please add that as a comment and go ahead with the commit
<fche>
agentzh, re. the second patch, I can't tell whether the reasoning is sufficient
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<fche>
can there be -any- initialization done by that stage that we could undo twice if we don't return there now?
<fche>
if you can make the case, sure, add that as a comment please.
<fche>
(I'd like to record more and more thinking-out-loud into the code base)
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
orivej has joined #systemtap
hpt has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
orivej_ has joined #systemtap
orivej_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
orivej_ has joined #systemtap
orivej_ has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
Guest47672 has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
Guest47672 has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
orivej_ has joined #systemtap
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
orivej_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
orivej has joined #systemtap
<agentzh>
fche: if we want to avoid deallocating twice, then it would be better to introduce a dedicated flag to protect it? it would be much safer.
<agentzh>
like a static top-level boolean variable?
<agentzh>
or a static local variable to that exit module function.
<agentzh>
i like the latter more.
<agentzh>
will add a comment and commit the first patch. thanks for the review.
<agentzh>
fche: is the first patch worth an entry in NEWS too?
<agentzh>
it looks important to me.
<agentzh>
since it has a relatively large impact for a long time.