On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 11:43 AM Jason Xing <kerneljasonx...@gmail.com> wrote: > > From: Jason Xing <kernelx...@tencent.com> > > Using the macro for other tracepoints use to be more concise. > No functional change. > > Jason Xing (3): > trace: move to TP_STORE_ADDRS related macro to net_probe_common.h > trace: use TP_STORE_ADDRS() macro in inet_sk_error_report() > trace: use TP_STORE_ADDRS() macro in inet_sock_set_state() > > include/trace/events/net_probe_common.h | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++ > include/trace/events/sock.h | 35 ++++---------------------
I just noticed that some trace files in include/trace directory (like net_probe_common.h, sock.h, skb.h, net.h, sock.h, udp.h, sctp.h, qdisc.h, neigh.h, napi.h, icmp.h, ...) are not owned by networking folks while some files (like tcp.h) have been maintained by specific maintainers/experts (like Eric) because they belong to one specific area. I wonder if we can get more networking guys involved in net tracing. I'm not sure if 1) we can put those files into the "NETWORKING [GENERAL]" category, or 2) we can create a new category to include them all. I know people start using BPF to trace them all instead, but I can see some good advantages of those hooks implemented in the kernel, say: 1) help those machines which are not easy to use BPF tools. 2) insert the tracepoint in the middle of some functions which cannot be replaced by bpf kprobe. 3) if we have enough tracepoints, we can generate a timeline to know/detect which flow/skb spends unexpected time at which point. ... We can do many things in this area, I think :) What do you think about this, Jakub, Paolo, Eric ? Thanks, Jason > include/trace/events/tcp.h | 29 -------------------- > 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.37.3 >
