Re: [PATCH 00/15] tracepoint: Avoid double static_branch evaluation at guarded call sites
From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Thu Mar 12 2026 - 13:10:39 EST
On Thu, 12 Mar 2026 09:54:29 -0700
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > emit_trace_foo()
> > > __trace_foo()
>
> this seems like the best approach, IMO. double-underscored variants
> are usually used for some specialized/internal version of a function
> when we know that some conditions are correct (e.g., lock is already
> taken, or something like that). Which fits here: trace_xxx() will
> check if tracepoint is enabled, while __trace_xxx() will not check and
> just invoke the tracepoint? It's short, it's distinct, and it says "I
> know what I am doing".
Honestly, I consider double underscore as internal only and not something
anyone but the subsystem maintainers use.
This, is a normal function where it's just saying: If you have it already
enabled, then you can use this. Thus, I don't think it qualifies as a "you
know what you are doing".
Perhaps: call_trace_foo() ?
-- Steve