Hello David, On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 10:12:08AM -0700, David Ahern wrote: > On 2/26/25 9:10 AM, Breno Leitao wrote: > >> Also, if a tracepoint is added, inside of tcp_sendmsg_locked would cover > >> more use cases (see kernel references to it). > > > > Agree, this seems to provide more useful information > > > >> We have a patch for a couple years now with a tracepoint inside the > > > > Sorry, where do you have this patch? is it downstream? > > company tree. Attached. Where to put tracepoints and what arguments to > supply so that it is beneficial to multiple users is always a touchy > subject :-)
Thanks. I would like to state that this would be useful for Meta as well. Right now, we (Meta) are using nasty `noinline` attribute in tcp_sendmsg() in order to make the API stable, and this tracepoint would solve this problem avoiding the `noinline` hack. So, at least two type of users would benefit from it. > so I have not tried to push the patch out. sock arg should > be added to it for example. True, if it becomes a tracepoint instead of a rawtracepoint, the sock arg might be useful. How would you recommend me proceeding in this case? Thanks --breno
