From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.zeus03.de (zeus03.de [194.117.254.33]) (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 C06DC3932D1 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2026 16:50:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773334224; cv=none; b=QPjS4vOLrPkk2vA2x/A4hnVk4wojsYI3rBSzNSJK0oaE83xJARn1ONHfGvkPPRPHWBG9Y9767K3fHn57/bKveeh1GwjzNoed/Ii5VvGxpo23Z4kvREhCYWf982E4IdiCu6w0dbdKNcVG8+rHSeNCds34R36XtjLPCfp83grT2cU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773334224; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Vu/AtXeAuApZgvU55tsnXQV9qTS+ilZ6eVLKJtSSib8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=YauZNDLKXpUES0lBgwJzNyp9+ekAUHxaEP9+laaf+eKZ322NZziA6D+Iuo1riM+k5VE8hdnaG7KqFEYnozmywvm1LMDCRBLtjWl+iwPD1FkTe2ItWHP28waLjwgM47WrMqKTa/+YQ8nphXtH24OHKa6zB+T5nx+3pIqBhhgm3lc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b=DIajkH8a; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b="DIajkH8a" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= sang-engineering.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=k1; bh=jgDs ke1It431HYOLY25QmR9+rotAbe+iAMW/3tgAjDw=; b=DIajkH8asd8LF+/wo1Oi ZBm/9XdJmdslwQXizqy4Kxixgt7wVsvj4b8209fi2901aPVG0iQXAlahBkUah88g asLaL4nMnJXkCrqD3FniI/Ob1Q0BkdYBIFLNsxwk+HKDonnjAOpOeGRoKtOW+pVv n6Tc9cOQmnMxoauR9xdZStBk0tDN59xiezfTDtXMBuTcX3gSJeQEsNH8XpXVr8+c GLTAaG6QF57KWZUr632gbelox3AjaJXxjZQ6uYF13ZO//FMitnTZ6bIeYUtr3ut8 4L16VBpw5KZIMgytzbBcoxV0reOqyffUJnov5Pva+tyaSAgK7CjtXyPfCgRHVa1R 6A== Received: (qmail 4160860 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2026 17:50:08 +0100 Received: by mail.zeus03.de with ESMTPSA (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted, authenticated); 12 Mar 2026 17:50:08 +0100 X-UD-Smtp-Session: l3s3148p1@9u2Ki9ZM6KoujnvS Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2026 17:50:07 +0100 From: Wolfram Sang To: "Vineeth Pillai (Google)" Cc: Steven Rostedt , Peter Zijlstra , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/15] i2c: Use trace_invoke_##name() at guarded tracepoint call sites Message-ID: References: <20260312150523.2054552-1-vineeth@bitbyteword.org> <20260312150523.2054552-13-vineeth@bitbyteword.org> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260312150523.2054552-13-vineeth@bitbyteword.org> On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 11:05:07AM -0400, Vineeth Pillai (Google) wrote: > Replace trace_foo() with the new trace_invoke_foo() at sites already > guarded by trace_foo_enabled(), avoiding a redundant > static_branch_unlikely() re-evaluation inside the tracepoint. > trace_invoke_foo() calls the tracepoint callbacks directly without > utilizing the static branch again. > > Suggested-by: Steven Rostedt > Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra > Signed-off-by: Vineeth Pillai (Google) > Assisted-by: Claude:claude-sonnet-4-6 >From my side, this can go upstream with the rest of this series (when it is ready). So: Acked-by: Wolfram Sang