[PATCH v3 01/11] io_uring: Use trace_call__##name() at guarded tracepoint call sites

[PATCH v3 01/11] io_uring: Use trace_call__##name() at guarded tracepoint call sites

[Vineeth Pillai (Google)]

From: Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>

Replace trace_foo() with the new trace_call__foo() at sites already
guarded by trace_foo_enabled(), avoiding a redundant
static_branch_unlikely() re-evaluation inside the tracepoint.
trace_call__foo() calls the tracepoint callbacks directly without
utilizing the static branch again.

Original v2 series:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/20260323160052.17528-1-vineeth@bitbyteword.org/

Parts of the original v2 series have already been merged in mainline.
This patch is being reposted as a follow-up cleanup for the remaining
unmerged pieces.

Suggested-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Vineeth Pillai (Google) <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
Assisted-by: Claude:claude-sonnet-4-6
---
 io_uring/io_uring.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.h b/io_uring/io_uring.h
index e612a66ee80e..1b657b714373 100644
--- a/io_uring/io_uring.h
+++ b/io_uring/io_uring.h
@@ -312,7 +312,7 @@ static __always_inline bool io_fill_cqe_req(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
 	}
 
 	if (trace_io_uring_complete_enabled())
-		trace_io_uring_complete(req->ctx, req, cqe);
+		trace_call__io_uring_complete(req->ctx, req, cqe);
 	return true;
 }
 
-- 
2.54.0

Re: (subset) [PATCH v3 01/11] io_uring: Use trace_call__##name() at guarded tracepoint call sites

[Jens Axboe]

On Fri, 15 May 2026 09:59:03 -0400, Vineeth Pillai (Google) wrote:
> Replace trace_foo() with the new trace_call__foo() at sites already
> guarded by trace_foo_enabled(), avoiding a redundant
> static_branch_unlikely() re-evaluation inside the tracepoint.
> trace_call__foo() calls the tracepoint callbacks directly without
> utilizing the static branch again.
> 
> Original v2 series:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/20260323160052.17528-1-vineeth@bitbyteword.org/
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[01/11] io_uring: Use trace_call__##name() at guarded tracepoint call sites
        commit: cf9a29544a01ff818c7f0a01716dc5e48f8ad7b5

Best regards,
-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] io_uring: Use trace_call__##name() at guarded tracepoint call sites

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 15 May 2026 09:59:03 -0400
"Vineeth Pillai (Google)" <vineeth@bitbyteword.org> wrote:

> From: Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
> 

Hi Vineeth,

> Replace trace_foo() with the new trace_call__foo() at sites already
> guarded by trace_foo_enabled(), avoiding a redundant
> static_branch_unlikely() re-evaluation inside the tracepoint.
> trace_call__foo() calls the tracepoint callbacks directly without
> utilizing the static branch again.
> 

> Original v2 series:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/20260323160052.17528-1-vineeth@bitbyteword.org/
> 
> Parts of the original v2 series have already been merged in mainline.
> This patch is being reposted as a follow-up cleanup for the remaining
> unmerged pieces.

This part should go below the '---'. There's no reason to add it to the git
change log.

You should probably also state that these can now go in individually as all
the dependencies are upstream.

> 
> Suggested-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Vineeth Pillai (Google) <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
> Assisted-by: Claude:claude-sonnet-4-6
> ---

  <<here>>

Thanks,

-- Steve

>  io_uring/io_uring.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/io_uring/io_uring.h b/io_uring/io_uring.h
> index e612a66ee80e..1b657b714373 100644
> --- a/io_uring/io_uring.h
> +++ b/io_uring/io_uring.h
> @@ -312,7 +312,7 @@ static __always_inline bool io_fill_cqe_req(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
>  	}
>  
>  	if (trace_io_uring_complete_enabled())
> -		trace_io_uring_complete(req->ctx, req, cqe);
> +		trace_call__io_uring_complete(req->ctx, req, cqe);
>  	return true;
>  }
>  

Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] io_uring: Use trace_call__##name() at guarded tracepoint call sites

[Jens Axboe]

On 5/15/26 8:04 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 15 May 2026 09:59:03 -0400
> "Vineeth Pillai (Google)" <vineeth@bitbyteword.org> wrote:
> 
>> From: Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
>>
> 
> Hi Vineeth,
> 
>> Replace trace_foo() with the new trace_call__foo() at sites already
>> guarded by trace_foo_enabled(), avoiding a redundant
>> static_branch_unlikely() re-evaluation inside the tracepoint.
>> trace_call__foo() calls the tracepoint callbacks directly without
>> utilizing the static branch again.
>>
> 
>> Original v2 series:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/20260323160052.17528-1-vineeth@bitbyteword.org/
>>
>> Parts of the original v2 series have already been merged in mainline.
>> This patch is being reposted as a follow-up cleanup for the remaining
>> unmerged pieces.
> 
> This part should go below the '---'. There's no reason to add it to the git
> change log.

I pruned it.

> You should probably also state that these can now go in individually as all
> the dependencies are upstream.

I think he did, at least that's how I read it.


-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] io_uring: Use trace_call__##name() at guarded tracepoint call sites

[Vineeth Remanan Pillai]

On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 10:06 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>
> On 5/15/26 8:04 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 May 2026 09:59:03 -0400
> > "Vineeth Pillai (Google)" <vineeth@bitbyteword.org> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Vineeth Pillai <vineeth@bitbyteword.org>
> >>
> >
> > Hi Vineeth,
> >
> >> Replace trace_foo() with the new trace_call__foo() at sites already
> >> guarded by trace_foo_enabled(), avoiding a redundant
> >> static_branch_unlikely() re-evaluation inside the tracepoint.
> >> trace_call__foo() calls the tracepoint callbacks directly without
> >> utilizing the static branch again.
> >>
> >
> >> Original v2 series:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/20260323160052.17528-1-vineeth@bitbyteword.org/
> >>
> >> Parts of the original v2 series have already been merged in mainline.
> >> This patch is being reposted as a follow-up cleanup for the remaining
> >> unmerged pieces.
> >
> > This part should go below the '---'. There's no reason to add it to the git
> > change log.
>
Ahh sorry about this.

> I pruned it.
>
Thanks Jen :-). I can probably send a follow-up email directly to the
maintainers to prune this part, similar to what Jen did. I guess one
more version might feel like spam.


> > You should probably also state that these can now go in individually as all
> > the dependencies are upstream.
>
> I think he did, at least that's how I read it.
>
Yeah my intention was this, not sure if I worded it correctly. I will
include this in the follow-up email to the maintainers for rest of the
patches.

Thanks,
Vineeth

Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] io_uring: Use trace_call__##name() at guarded tracepoint call sites

[Jens Axboe]

On 5/15/26 8:14 AM, Vineeth Remanan Pillai wrote:
> Thanks Jen :-). I can probably send a follow-up email directly to the
> maintainers to prune this part, similar to what Jen did. I guess one
> more version might feel like spam.

Jens...

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] io_uring: Use trace_call__##name() at guarded tracepoint call sites

[Vineeth Remanan Pillai]

On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 10:25 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>
> On 5/15/26 8:14 AM, Vineeth Remanan Pillai wrote:
> > Thanks Jen :-). I can probably send a follow-up email directly to the
> > maintainers to prune this part, similar to what Jen did. I guess one
> > more version might feel like spam.
>
> Jens...
>
Oops my bad, truly sorry about the misspelling.