Re: [PATCH 00/15] tracepoint: Avoid double static_branch evaluation at guarded call sites
Mathieu Desnoyers <[email protected]> Tue, 17 Mar 2026 12:02:07 -0400
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-sctp,org.freedesktop.lists.amd-gfx,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.kernel.vger.bpf,org.kernel.vger.io-uring,org.kernel.vger.linux-btrfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-i2c,org.kernel.vger.linux-input,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-pm,org.kernel.vger.linux-scsi,org.kernel.vger.linux-spi,org.kernel.vger.linux-trace-kernel,org.kernel.vger.netdev |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2026-03-17 12:00, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 10:02:32 -0400 > Vineeth Remanan Pillai <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> >>> Perhaps: call_trace_foo() ? >>> >> call_trace_foo has one collision with the tracepoint >> sched_update_nr_running and a function >> call_trace_sched_update_nr_running. I had considered this and later >> moved to trace_invoke_foo() because of the collision. But I can rename >> call_trace_sched_update_nr_running to something else if call_trace_foo >> is the general consensus. > > OK, then lets go with: trace_call__foo() > > The double underscore should prevent any name collisions. > > Does anyone have an objections? I'm OK with it. Thanks! Mathieu -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. https://www.efficios.com