From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: Add trace events for all receive exit points
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2018 15:40:35 -0500
Message-ID: <20181112154035.56de5e23@vmware.local.home>
References: <20181112194405.4133-1-gbastien@versatic.net>
        <879033794.3997.1542053367213.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
        <2134979231.4006.1542054055701.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: =?UTF-8?B?R2VuZXZpw6h2ZQ==?= Bastien <gbastien@versatic.net>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:33810 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1725834AbeKMGfa (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 13 Nov 2018 01:35:30 -0500
In-Reply-To: <2134979231.4006.1542054055701.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 15:20:55 -0500 (EST)
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:

> 
> Hrm, looking at this again, I notice that there is a single DEFINE_EVENT
> using net_dev_template_simple.
> 
> We could simply turn netif_receive_skb_list_exit into a TRACE_EVENT(),
> remove the net_dev_template_simple, and rename the net_dev_template_return
> to net_dev_template ?

This too is only cosmetic and doesn't affect the code at all, because a
TRACE_EVENT() is really just:

#define TRACE_EVENT(name, proto, args, tstruct, assign, print) \
	DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(name,			       \
			     PARAMS(proto),		       \
			     PARAMS(args),		       \
			     PARAMS(tstruct),		       \
			     PARAMS(assign),		       \
			     PARAMS(print));		       \
	DEFINE_EVENT(name, name, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args));

-- Steve

> 
> It's pretty clear from the prototype that it expects a "ret" argument,
> so I don't see the need to also state it in the template name.
> 
>