Re: [PATCH 5/5] proc: export more page flags in /proc/kpageflags

[Pekka Enberg]

Hi Andi,

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Yes, zero overhead is important for certain things (like
>> CONFIG_SLUB_STATS, for example). However, putting slab allocator
>> specific checks in fs/proc looks pretty fragile to me. It would be nice
>
> Ok, perhaps that could be put into a inline into slab.h. Would
> that address your concerns?

Yeah, I'm fine with that. Putting them in the individual
slub_def.h/slob_def.h headers might be even better.

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Also, while you probably don't want to use tracepoints for this kind of
>> instrumentation, you might want to look into reusing the ftrace
>> reporting bits.
>
> There's already perfectly fine code in tree for this, I don't see why it would
> need another infrastructure that doesn't really fit anyways.

It's just that I suspect that we want page flag printing and
zero-overhead statistics for kmemtrace at some point. But anyway, I'm
not objecting to extending /proc/kpageflags if that's what people want
to do.

                                          Pekka
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/