On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 10:06 AM Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 5/15/26 8:04 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Fri, 15 May 2026 09:59:03 -0400 > > "Vineeth Pillai (Google)" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> From: Vineeth Pillai <[email protected]> > >> > > > > Hi Vineeth, > > > >> Replace trace_foo() with the new trace_call__foo() at sites already > >> guarded by trace_foo_enabled(), avoiding a redundant > >> static_branch_unlikely() re-evaluation inside the tracepoint. > >> trace_call__foo() calls the tracepoint callbacks directly without > >> utilizing the static branch again. > >> > > > >> Original v2 series: > >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/[email protected]/ > >> > >> Parts of the original v2 series have already been merged in mainline. > >> This patch is being reposted as a follow-up cleanup for the remaining > >> unmerged pieces. > > > > This part should go below the '---'. There's no reason to add it to the git > > change log. > Ahh sorry about this.
> I pruned it. > Thanks Jen :-). I can probably send a follow-up email directly to the maintainers to prune this part, similar to what Jen did. I guess one more version might feel like spam. > > You should probably also state that these can now go in individually as all > > the dependencies are upstream. > > I think he did, at least that's how I read it. > Yeah my intention was this, not sure if I worded it correctly. I will include this in the follow-up email to the maintainers for rest of the patches. Thanks, Vineeth
