[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1b17ce33-015f-4a10-9a98-ebea586c3ce4@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 21:57:56 -0700
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Masami Hiramatsu
<mhiramat@...nel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, kuniyu@...zon.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
yonghong.song@...ux.dev, song@...nel.org, kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] udp: Add tracepoint for udp_sendmsg()
On 4/17/25 10:00 AM, Breno Leitao wrote:
>> $ git grep trace_ net drivers/net | grep _tp
>> net/bpf/test_run.c: trace_bpf_trigger_tp(nonce);
>> net/ipv4/tcp_input.c: trace_tcp_cwnd_reduction_tp(sk,
>> newly_acked_sacked, newly_lost, flag);
>
> Do we want to rename them and remove the _tp? I suppose it is OK given
> that tracepoints are not expected to be stable?
>
> Also, if we have consensus about this patch, I will remove the _tp from
> it.
>
I am only asking for consistency. Based on existing networking
instances, consistency is no _tp suffix.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists