[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aDXB+ZqQZyQkEREM@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 06:45:29 -0700
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@...a.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
"kuniyu@...zon.com" <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"yonghong.song@...ux.dev" <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>,
"song@...nel.org" <song@...nel.org>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@...a.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] udp: Add tracepoint for udp_sendmsg()
Hello,
On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 10:49:22AM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> Song Liu wrote:
> > Do you mean we need to also add tracepoints for udpv6_sendmsg?
>
> If there is consensus that a tracepoint at this point is valuable,
> then it should be supported equally for IPv4 and IPv6.
>
> That holds true for all such hooks. No IPv4 only.
Revamping this thread to make sure we have a conclusion.
Any objection for not having the tracepoint in UDP sendmsg, both IPv4
and IPv6?
Thanks
--breno
Powered by blists - more mailing lists