On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 12:02 PM Mathieu Desnoyers mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com wrote:
On 2026-03-17 12:00, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 10:02:32 -0400 Vineeth Remanan Pillai vineeth@bitbyteword.org wrote:
Perhaps: call_trace_foo() ?
call_trace_foo has one collision with the tracepoint sched_update_nr_running and a function call_trace_sched_update_nr_running. I had considered this and later moved to trace_invoke_foo() because of the collision. But I can rename call_trace_sched_update_nr_running to something else if call_trace_foo is the general consensus.
OK, then lets go with: trace_call__foo()
The double underscore should prevent any name collisions.
Does anyone have an objections?
I'm OK with it.
Great thanks! I shall send a v2 with s/trace_invoke_foo/trace_call__foo/ soon.
Thanks, Vineeth