On Thu, 18 Sep 2025 12:38:56 +0100 Pedro Falcato pfalcato@suse.de wrote:
Isn't the usual problem with that approach, that of static functions/static inline functions? I was tracing through a problem a few months ago, and man I really did think "wouldn't it be nice to have a tracepoint instead of fishing around for kprobe spots".
Not that I particularly think a tracepoint is super worth it in this case, but, y'know.
Yes, it would be useful. The issue is that tracepoints are not free. They do increase the I$ hit and take up memory.
If you're going to inject a tracepoint somewhere, at least extract some useful information from that spot. If you can't think of anything to track, then it's not worth a tracepoint.
If one really wants a way to track something, they could add a static branch that would call a function when enabled that could be traced. They would also need a way to enable that static branch.
-- Steve