From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0015.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE63C4921AD; Wed, 13 May 2026 18:05:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.15 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778695540; cv=none; b=Vn5uATBhlciscNIYWv0Hekhhy3k00zSuLEJ6Jb4VbrPLDH1SMV9kXQIlATa9QsPA1mSdPZlosoVzreGIsRYI+RuzgZr9dtigvaZbfcNEYQXJws9xhlB7aVtrCwZHaevZh/2HTKeEnuMOqB/mZhcMopl0kNzf5dvLxMumY7epg+c= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778695540; c=relaxed/simple; bh=FObxA9O8YlCMGsU3/ZR+niQKY9nN/fot3Xvsd3q5eO4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=p3shq++PDhON016EprNNl4la7Wud2LDxoG58ufus9WTWT7D5WM5HkRRB4JgZMQpDFYMCsmk3Uw8ZV6+zUyXHoub8/x8P6IInnSH6pfe6YKgZWLvFEzHFH4PjwKU+ckzxBsFO7o6bJqQpwVg+snJhUQLtMQ+dbdavY9dSFbYqJzY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.15 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org Received: from omf01.hostedemail.com (lb01a-stub [10.200.18.249]) by unirelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC91B1C04D0; Wed, 13 May 2026 17:57:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: rostedt@goodmis.org) by omf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1D48D6000F; Wed, 13 May 2026 17:57:38 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 13 May 2026 13:57:41 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Li Chen Cc: Zhang Yi , Theodore Ts'o , Andreas Dilger , Baokun Li , Jan Kara , Ojaswin Mujoo , "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" , Zhang Yi , Masami Hiramatsu , Mathieu Desnoyers , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC v7 6/7] ext4: fast commit: add lock_updates tracepoint Message-ID: <20260513135741.12ddb97d@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20260511084304.1559557-7-me@linux.beauty> References: <20260511084304.1559557-1-me@linux.beauty> <20260511084304.1559557-7-me@linux.beauty> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.20.0git84 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspamout05 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 1D48D6000F X-Stat-Signature: 4n9dw11booan7j44n9eumqkhjdm1wa75 X-Session-Marker: 726F737465647440676F6F646D69732E6F7267 X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX198duJXJ7wa7OrYOcnAKNIQEiQ8oDaDQ+g= X-HE-Tag: 1778695058-680248 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX18Bin5lS/zgG/Cski0L9LniJ7uE3uk964hOlPKW1SqSMAbh7b7ypwRwadFWPkrRs7paoB7tt7AWoJ3fn8EH8JbON+PcO0tWzSUl71fB/qhW83OFS376KUQQd/ruwjuFjki9WnkQmRepV8Qjhue+E3gxkFKtY31tBDOt+bS5Y4/0U5cIzlYGecnuSrM2ikUFvZVb09ihimTa27AESNuazG4CQc6H9TZQW82hBC9LGYFLv6n/1byieBRrd6w2kdOtPo5o/PWS7SNR+NPYkimSfN2JzItsHrkoGihp5bdv+N9/m7B7/fXulFiT On Mon, 11 May 2026 16:43:01 +0800 Li Chen wrote: > @@ -1346,8 +1383,15 @@ static int ext4_fc_perform_commit(journal_t *journal) > } > ext4_fc_unlock(sb, alloc_ctx); > > - ret = ext4_fc_snapshot_inodes(journal, inodes, inodes_size); > + ret = ext4_fc_snapshot_inodes(journal, inodes, inodes_size, > + &snap_inodes, &snap_ranges, &snap_err); > jbd2_journal_unlock_updates(journal); > + if (trace_ext4_fc_lock_updates_enabled()) { > + locked_ns = ktime_to_ns(ktime_sub(ktime_get(), lock_start)); > + trace_ext4_fc_lock_updates(sb, commit_tid, locked_ns, > + snap_inodes, snap_ranges, ret, > + snap_err); Please change this to: trace_call__ext4_fc_lock_updates(...) As the "trace_ext4_fc_lock_updates_enabled()" already has the static branch. No need to do it twice anymore. 7.1 introduced the "trace_call__foo()" that will do a direct call to the tracepoints registered, without the need for another static branch. -- Steve > + }