On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 11:42:54AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > Mark Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> > though not loving the naming here, I'll have a hard time figuring out > > what the weird call is about next time I look at that code > Would: > trace_call__foo() > Be better? > Or do you have another name we should use? Possibly an _unchecked or something? Honestly the suggestion someone had for _do seemed OK to me. Part of it is that I wouldn't think of tracepoints as being something that I'd call.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
