Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

dtrace: fix signature mismatch
ClosedPublic

Authored by aokblast on Feb 23 2025, 5:43 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
F115648401: D49112.diff
Sat, Apr 26, 1:07 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, Apr 17, 2:33 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Apr 5, 11:11 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 20 2025, 3:01 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 14 2025, 6:23 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 12 2025, 11:18 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 10 2025, 5:56 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 8 2025, 12:40 AM
Subscribers

Diff Detail

Repository
rG FreeBSD src repository
Lint
Lint Not Applicable
Unit
Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/dtrace/dtrace.c
13002

This function is called directly in some places, so the patch doesn't compile.

For the taskq_dispatch case, I'd introduce a wrapper like:

static void
dtrace_enabling_matchall_task(void *args __unused)
{
    dtrace_enabling_matchall();
}

Sorry. Too much patch at the same time.

I forgot to cherry-pick the patch from my kcfi work branch.

sys/cddl/contrib/opensolaris/uts/common/dtrace/dtrace.c
12998

Remove redundant return statement

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Feb 24 2025, 2:22 AM

BTW, a question is that it is put inside the opensolaris directory. Should I upstream to illumos? I don't find the counterpart on illumos.

BTW, a question is that it is put inside the opensolaris directory. Should I upstream to illumos? I don't find the counterpart on illumos.

It's not necessary from my point of view. Our copy of dtrace has diverged from illumos quite a lot over time. It is also not particularly easy to upstream such small patches to illumos unless they fix some concrete bug, in my (limited) experience. You can try of course, I just would not say that it's necessary.

I see. Thanks.

Here is the patch for merging.