From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, jack@suse.cz, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
david@fromorbit.com, hch@lst.de, axboe@kernel.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] writeback: tracking subsystems causing writeback
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 22:23:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87eig2ixez.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimhsQdLV7UeMppz8mwzQPUfDQbvdNdOCiVnxdKM@mail.gmail.com> (Michael Rubin's message of "Sat, 19 Jun 2010 10:49:34 -0700")
Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com> writes:
>
> I agree. This would put the kernel in a box a bit. Some of them
> (sys_sync, periodic writeback, free_more_memory) I feel are generic
> enough concepts that with some rewording of the labels they could be
> exposed with no issue. "Balance_dirty_pages" is an example where that
> won't work.
Yes some rewording would be good.
> Are there alternatives to this? Maybe tracepoints that are compiled to be on?
> A CONFIG_WRITEBACK_DEBUG that would expose this file?
The classic way is to put it into debugfs which has a appropiate
disclaimer.
(although I fear we're weaning apps that depend on debugfs too
The growing ftrace user space code seems to all depend on debugfs)
> Having this set of info readily available and collected makes
> debugging a lot easier. But I admit I am not sure the best way to
> expose them.
Maybe we just need a simpler writeback path that is not as complicated
to debug.
-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, jack@suse.cz, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
david@fromorbit.com, hch@lst.de, axboe@kernel.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] writeback: tracking subsystems causing writeback
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 22:23:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87eig2ixez.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimhsQdLV7UeMppz8mwzQPUfDQbvdNdOCiVnxdKM@mail.gmail.com> (Michael Rubin's message of "Sat, 19 Jun 2010 10:49:34 -0700")
Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com> writes:
>
> I agree. This would put the kernel in a box a bit. Some of them
> (sys_sync, periodic writeback, free_more_memory) I feel are generic
> enough concepts that with some rewording of the labels they could be
> exposed with no issue. "Balance_dirty_pages" is an example where that
> won't work.
Yes some rewording would be good.
> Are there alternatives to this? Maybe tracepoints that are compiled to be on?
> A CONFIG_WRITEBACK_DEBUG that would expose this file?
The classic way is to put it into debugfs which has a appropiate
disclaimer.
(although I fear we're weaning apps that depend on debugfs too
The growing ftrace user space code seems to all depend on debugfs)
> Having this set of info readily available and collected makes
> debugging a lot easier. But I admit I am not sure the best way to
> expose them.
Maybe we just need a simpler writeback path that is not as complicated
to debug.
-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-19 20:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-19 0:30 [PATCH 0/3] writeback visibility Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 0:30 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 0:30 ` [PATCH 1/3] writeback: Creating /sys/kernel/mm/writeback/writeback Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 0:30 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 10:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-19 10:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-19 17:44 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 17:44 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 17:44 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 0:30 ` [PATCH 2/3] writeback: per bdi monitoring Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 0:30 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 0:30 ` [PATCH 3/3] writeback: tracking subsystems causing writeback Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 0:30 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 8:17 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-19 8:17 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-19 17:49 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 17:49 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-19 20:23 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2010-06-19 20:23 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-20 23:10 ` [PATCH 0/3] writeback visibility Dave Chinner
2010-06-20 23:10 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-21 17:09 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-21 17:09 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-24 0:02 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-24 0:02 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-24 0:02 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-25 7:15 ` Michael Rubin
2010-06-25 7:15 ` Michael Rubin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87eig2ixez.fsf@basil.nowhere.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mrubin@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.