On Sun, 4 Feb 2018 15:30:04 +0000 (UTC)
Mathieu Desnoyers [off-list ref] wrote:

This should therefore leave a door open to adding new tracepoints: cases
where the data gathered is shown to be useful enough for tools targeting
an audience wider than just kernel developers. To improve over the current
situation, we should think about documenting some rules about how those
tools should cope with tracepoints changing over time (event version,
tools backward compatibility, and so on), and make sure the ABI exposes
the information required to help tools cope with change.

As I mentioned earlier. If a function based event proves to be useful
enough to pull out information that sysadmins et.al. find beneficial,
than that could be used as an argument to create a normal static
tracepoint for that information.

-- Steve