Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] bridge: add tracepoint in br_fdb_update

From: Stephen Hemminger <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 15:43:44 -0700

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 23:50:26 +0200
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <[email-masked]> wrote:

> On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 11:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
> David Miller <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> > From: Roopa Prabhu <[email-masked]>
> > Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 22:18:13 -0700
> >   
> > > From: Roopa Prabhu <[email-masked]>
> > > 
> > > This extends bridge fdb table tracepoints to also cover
> > > learned fdb entries in the br_fdb_update path. Note that
> > > unlike other tracepoints I have moved this to when the fdb
> > > is modified because this is in the datapath and can generate
> > > a lot of noise in the trace output. br_fdb_update is also called
> > > from added_by_user context in the NTF_USE case which is already
> > > traced ..hence the !added_by_user check.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Roopa Prabhu <[email-masked]>    
> > 
> > Applied.
> > 
> > Let's use dev->name for now and if the tooling can eventually
> > do transparent ifindex->name then we can consider redoing
> > a bunch of networking tracepoints.  
> 
> I agree! :-)
> 

Agreed, but it is yet another case of tracepoints not having
a stable ABI. There is no ABI guarantee on tracing, but it still
makes for user complaints.