From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) (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 20C943E2AB5; Fri, 15 May 2026 18:50:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778871054; cv=none; b=MJDlnZDKSsvCJplG3e+pDAQBKkqK/rypQA4bJO6waWCHOATkKjw12sQ8XXmTY4K8dAc7LARkvfa69S1a2h5CVi+SReV3qp0yGm/dTlhnpP1ckmnKsBn1kOIHA8DtW/CaWBzes3XuAAGDPUzZAXfWDSTx9jca+OybKkumOcQ2iyc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778871054; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Fh5nIpKIEkRcePCEGBEElyMGaMyAieIuHMAMa3JLQKc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=t30DQhOlqmG0X2yU+SDIAVi8G/NsccL640HhzrNlLzuleGsA7gfqJwRczf0FuDMegc96pzvPBP6an4htCfXE4QOHcl9d5RWOjs+YwXyUipvyuezLDGRGhURmx7j/zdvhFYG4luQByjrFY791ASZm5ii1kILwHEulHQCDP/VWva0= 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=216.40.44.14 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 omf03.hostedemail.com (lb01a-stub [10.200.18.249]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80D43160141; Fri, 15 May 2026 18:50:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: rostedt@goodmis.org) by omf03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A64386000A; Fri, 15 May 2026 18:50:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 15 May 2026 14:50:48 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Bart Van Assche Cc: "Vineeth Pillai (Google)" , "James E.J. Bottomley" , "Martin K. Petersen" , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/11] scsi: ufs: Use trace_call__##name() at guarded tracepoint call sites Message-ID: <20260515145048.1c021bc9@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <9fde73e7-0108-48d7-a1a0-ccc9776beb5c@acm.org> References: <20260515135946.2238888-1-vineeth@bitbyteword.org> <9fde73e7-0108-48d7-a1a0-ccc9776beb5c@acm.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.20.0git84 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@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-Stat-Signature: w5gpk5wojme4p8f8rrjh4175dhuiaho5 X-Rspamd-Server: rspamout02 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: A64386000A X-Session-Marker: 726F737465647440676F6F646D69732E6F7267 X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX1/lFLOMhLKhFr6Eb1OV9O9g+yqC6Yty8l0= X-HE-Tag: 1778871041-350002 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX18KIYL7SUQ2xQVpSH5T5kZIcsMwMPv9mvMpLdospCP7ZQKNVNhMSM3zbIU/H66gjIKgAJ91J1uGh/FiOY2uL9V4kAECr092XuR+LeI8mPmMFvonO1lIUTQjS7VmxX0UV8IygAHXNfTAKMAVriEHSuP6NAkUuQuf9aE6pZNtcQcBYj6ppOsDYGks4SQ6UYIQaXIoU7GBh9I1QXW7jKBDq5wilWYz4nvsVjV7rrPmfTxHmaXUvBU3H825iHtfl/pwiirvSTR7mNDgzbd/+2CKFx4YloTGgvevu7tulZ/a5pBqItyto4hjCcStVQ1WxjxNIGfg8TUZa1oAKRs5YnmOj/fV On Fri, 15 May 2026 08:27:27 -0700 Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 5/15/26 6:59 AM, Vineeth Pillai (Google) wrote: > > static void ufshcd_add_query_upiu_trace(struct ufs_hba *hba, > > @@ -432,8 +432,8 @@ static void ufshcd_add_query_upiu_trace(struct ufs_hba *hba, > > if (!trace_ufshcd_upiu_enabled()) > > return; > > > > - trace_ufshcd_upiu(hba, str_t, &rq_rsp->header, > > - &rq_rsp->qr, UFS_TSF_OSF); > > + trace_call__ufshcd_upiu(hba, str_t, &rq_rsp->header, > > + &rq_rsp->qr, UFS_TSF_OSF); > > } > > Instead of making this change, please remove the > trace_ufshcd_upiu_enabled() call because it is redundant. You mean to remove the ufshcd_add_query_upiu_trace() function and just use a tracepoint where it is called? Makes sense. > > > static void ufshcd_add_tm_upiu_trace(struct ufs_hba *hba, unsigned int tag, > > @@ -445,15 +445,15 @@ static void ufshcd_add_tm_upiu_trace(struct ufs_hba *hba, unsigned int tag, > > return; > > > > if (str_t == UFS_TM_SEND) > > - trace_ufshcd_upiu(hba, str_t, > > - &descp->upiu_req.req_header, > > - &descp->upiu_req.input_param1, > > - UFS_TSF_TM_INPUT); > > + trace_call__ufshcd_upiu(hba, str_t, > > + &descp->upiu_req.req_header, > > + &descp->upiu_req.input_param1, > > + UFS_TSF_TM_INPUT); > > else > > - trace_ufshcd_upiu(hba, str_t, > > - &descp->upiu_rsp.rsp_header, > > - &descp->upiu_rsp.output_param1, > > - UFS_TSF_TM_OUTPUT); > > + trace_call__ufshcd_upiu(hba, str_t, > > + &descp->upiu_rsp.rsp_header, > > + &descp->upiu_rsp.output_param1, > > + UFS_TSF_TM_OUTPUT); > > } > > Same comment here: I think it would be better to remove the > trace_ufshcd_upiu_enabled() call rather than > changing trace_ufshcd_upiu() into trace_call__ufshcd_upiu(). Well, removing it here would mean placing the if (str == UFS_TM_SEND) into the code and processing it even when tracing is disabled. With the trace_*_enabled() helper, it's all a nop. -- Steve