* Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg [not found] <20231101102837.25205-3-ddrokosov@salutedevices.com> @ 2023-11-01 15:44 ` kernel test robot 2023-11-01 17:53 ` Dmitry Rokosov 2023-11-02 4:03 ` kernel test robot 1 sibling, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: kernel test robot @ 2023-11-01 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dmitry Rokosov, rostedt, mhiramat, hannes, mhocko, roman.gushchin, shakeelb, muchun.song, akpm Cc: llvm, oe-kbuild-all, kernel, rockosov, cgroups, linux-mm, linux-kernel, bpf, Dmitry Rokosov Hi Dmitry, kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: [auto build test ERROR on akpm-mm/mm-everything] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Dmitry-Rokosov/mm-memcg-print-out-cgroup-name-in-the-memcg-tracepoints/20231101-183040 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-everything patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231101102837.25205-3-ddrokosov%40salutedevices.com patch subject: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg config: um-allyesconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231101/202311012319.7ULVSdyR-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: clang version 14.0.6 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git f28c006a5895fc0e329fe15fead81e37457cb1d1) reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231101/202311012319.7ULVSdyR-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202311012319.7ULVSdyR-lkp@intel.com/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): In file included from mm/vmscan.c:19: In file included from include/linux/kernel_stat.h:9: In file included from include/linux/interrupt.h:11: In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5: In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24: include/asm-generic/io.h:547:31: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] val = __raw_readb(PCI_IOBASE + addr); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:560:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] val = __le16_to_cpu((__le16 __force)__raw_readw(PCI_IOBASE + addr)); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:37:51: note: expanded from macro '__le16_to_cpu' #define __le16_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u16)(__le16)(x)) ^ In file included from mm/vmscan.c:19: In file included from include/linux/kernel_stat.h:9: In file included from include/linux/interrupt.h:11: In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5: In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24: include/asm-generic/io.h:573:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] val = __le32_to_cpu((__le32 __force)__raw_readl(PCI_IOBASE + addr)); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:35:51: note: expanded from macro '__le32_to_cpu' #define __le32_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u32)(__le32)(x)) ^ In file included from mm/vmscan.c:19: In file included from include/linux/kernel_stat.h:9: In file included from include/linux/interrupt.h:11: In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5: In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24: include/asm-generic/io.h:584:33: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] __raw_writeb(value, PCI_IOBASE + addr); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:594:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] __raw_writew((u16 __force)cpu_to_le16(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:604:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] __raw_writel((u32 __force)cpu_to_le32(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:692:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] readsb(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:700:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] readsw(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:708:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] readsl(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:717:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] writesb(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:726:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] writesw(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ include/asm-generic/io.h:735:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] writesl(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ >> mm/vmscan.c:5811:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration] trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin(memcg, ^ mm/vmscan.c:5811:3: note: did you mean 'trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active'? include/trace/events/vmscan.h:467:1: note: 'trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active' declared here TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active, ^ include/linux/tracepoint.h:566:2: note: expanded from macro 'TRACE_EVENT' DECLARE_TRACE(name, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args)) ^ include/linux/tracepoint.h:432:2: note: expanded from macro 'DECLARE_TRACE' __DECLARE_TRACE(name, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args), \ ^ include/linux/tracepoint.h:355:21: note: expanded from macro '__DECLARE_TRACE' static inline void trace_##name(proto) \ ^ <scratch space>:33:1: note: expanded from here trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active ^ >> mm/vmscan.c:5845:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration] trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end(memcg, ^ mm/vmscan.c:5845:3: note: did you mean 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin'? mm/vmscan.c:5811:3: note: 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin' declared here trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin(memcg, ^ 12 warnings and 2 errors generated. vim +/trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin +5811 mm/vmscan.c 5791 5792 static void shrink_node_memcgs(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) 5793 { 5794 struct mem_cgroup *target_memcg = sc->target_mem_cgroup; 5795 struct mem_cgroup *memcg; 5796 5797 memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(target_memcg, NULL, NULL); 5798 do { 5799 struct lruvec *lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(memcg, pgdat); 5800 unsigned long reclaimed; 5801 unsigned long scanned; 5802 5803 /* 5804 * This loop can become CPU-bound when target memcgs 5805 * aren't eligible for reclaim - either because they 5806 * don't have any reclaimable pages, or because their 5807 * memory is explicitly protected. Avoid soft lockups. 5808 */ 5809 cond_resched(); 5810 > 5811 trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin(memcg, 5812 sc->order, 5813 sc->gfp_mask); 5814 5815 mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(target_memcg, memcg); 5816 5817 if (mem_cgroup_below_min(target_memcg, memcg)) { 5818 /* 5819 * Hard protection. 5820 * If there is no reclaimable memory, OOM. 5821 */ 5822 continue; 5823 } else if (mem_cgroup_below_low(target_memcg, memcg)) { 5824 /* 5825 * Soft protection. 5826 * Respect the protection only as long as 5827 * there is an unprotected supply 5828 * of reclaimable memory from other cgroups. 5829 */ 5830 if (!sc->memcg_low_reclaim) { 5831 sc->memcg_low_skipped = 1; 5832 continue; 5833 } 5834 memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_LOW); 5835 } 5836 5837 reclaimed = sc->nr_reclaimed; 5838 scanned = sc->nr_scanned; 5839 5840 shrink_lruvec(lruvec, sc); 5841 5842 shrink_slab(sc->gfp_mask, pgdat->node_id, memcg, 5843 sc->priority); 5844 > 5845 trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end(memcg, 5846 sc->nr_reclaimed - reclaimed); 5847 5848 /* Record the group's reclaim efficiency */ 5849 if (!sc->proactive) 5850 vmpressure(sc->gfp_mask, memcg, false, 5851 sc->nr_scanned - scanned, 5852 sc->nr_reclaimed - reclaimed); 5853 5854 } while ((memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(target_memcg, memcg, NULL))); 5855 } 5856 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg 2023-11-01 15:44 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg kernel test robot @ 2023-11-01 17:53 ` Dmitry Rokosov 0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Dmitry Rokosov @ 2023-11-01 17:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: kernel test robot Cc: rostedt, mhiramat, hannes, mhocko, roman.gushchin, shakeelb, muchun.song, akpm, llvm, oe-kbuild-all, kernel, rockosov, cgroups, linux-mm, linux-kernel, bpf Oh, I apologize for that. It seems that I need to wrap the new tracepoint calls with CONFIG_MEMCG. I will proceed to prepare the new version. On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 11:44:10PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: > > [auto build test ERROR on akpm-mm/mm-everything] > > url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Dmitry-Rokosov/mm-memcg-print-out-cgroup-name-in-the-memcg-tracepoints/20231101-183040 > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-everything > patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231101102837.25205-3-ddrokosov%40salutedevices.com > patch subject: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg > config: um-allyesconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231101/202311012319.7ULVSdyR-lkp@intel.com/config) > compiler: clang version 14.0.6 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git f28c006a5895fc0e329fe15fead81e37457cb1d1) > reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231101/202311012319.7ULVSdyR-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) > > If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of > the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags > | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202311012319.7ULVSdyR-lkp@intel.com/ > > All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): > > In file included from mm/vmscan.c:19: > In file included from include/linux/kernel_stat.h:9: > In file included from include/linux/interrupt.h:11: > In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: > In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5: > In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: > In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: > In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: > In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24: > include/asm-generic/io.h:547:31: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > val = __raw_readb(PCI_IOBASE + addr); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:560:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > val = __le16_to_cpu((__le16 __force)__raw_readw(PCI_IOBASE + addr)); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:37:51: note: expanded from macro '__le16_to_cpu' > #define __le16_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u16)(__le16)(x)) > ^ > In file included from mm/vmscan.c:19: > In file included from include/linux/kernel_stat.h:9: > In file included from include/linux/interrupt.h:11: > In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: > In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5: > In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: > In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: > In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: > In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24: > include/asm-generic/io.h:573:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > val = __le32_to_cpu((__le32 __force)__raw_readl(PCI_IOBASE + addr)); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:35:51: note: expanded from macro '__le32_to_cpu' > #define __le32_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u32)(__le32)(x)) > ^ > In file included from mm/vmscan.c:19: > In file included from include/linux/kernel_stat.h:9: > In file included from include/linux/interrupt.h:11: > In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: > In file included from arch/um/include/asm/hardirq.h:5: > In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: > In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: > In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: > In file included from arch/um/include/asm/io.h:24: > include/asm-generic/io.h:584:33: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > __raw_writeb(value, PCI_IOBASE + addr); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:594:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > __raw_writew((u16 __force)cpu_to_le16(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:604:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > __raw_writel((u32 __force)cpu_to_le32(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:692:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > readsb(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:700:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > readsw(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:708:20: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > readsl(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:717:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > writesb(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:726:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > writesw(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:735:21: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > writesl(PCI_IOBASE + addr, buffer, count); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > >> mm/vmscan.c:5811:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration] > trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin(memcg, > ^ > mm/vmscan.c:5811:3: note: did you mean 'trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active'? > include/trace/events/vmscan.h:467:1: note: 'trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active' declared here > TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active, > ^ > include/linux/tracepoint.h:566:2: note: expanded from macro 'TRACE_EVENT' > DECLARE_TRACE(name, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args)) > ^ > include/linux/tracepoint.h:432:2: note: expanded from macro 'DECLARE_TRACE' > __DECLARE_TRACE(name, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args), \ > ^ > include/linux/tracepoint.h:355:21: note: expanded from macro '__DECLARE_TRACE' > static inline void trace_##name(proto) \ > ^ > <scratch space>:33:1: note: expanded from here > trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active > ^ > >> mm/vmscan.c:5845:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration] > trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end(memcg, > ^ > mm/vmscan.c:5845:3: note: did you mean 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin'? > mm/vmscan.c:5811:3: note: 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin' declared here > trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin(memcg, > ^ > 12 warnings and 2 errors generated. > > > vim +/trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin +5811 mm/vmscan.c > > 5791 > 5792 static void shrink_node_memcgs(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) > 5793 { > 5794 struct mem_cgroup *target_memcg = sc->target_mem_cgroup; > 5795 struct mem_cgroup *memcg; > 5796 > 5797 memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(target_memcg, NULL, NULL); > 5798 do { > 5799 struct lruvec *lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(memcg, pgdat); > 5800 unsigned long reclaimed; > 5801 unsigned long scanned; > 5802 > 5803 /* > 5804 * This loop can become CPU-bound when target memcgs > 5805 * aren't eligible for reclaim - either because they > 5806 * don't have any reclaimable pages, or because their > 5807 * memory is explicitly protected. Avoid soft lockups. > 5808 */ > 5809 cond_resched(); > 5810 > > 5811 trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin(memcg, > 5812 sc->order, > 5813 sc->gfp_mask); > 5814 > 5815 mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(target_memcg, memcg); > 5816 > 5817 if (mem_cgroup_below_min(target_memcg, memcg)) { > 5818 /* > 5819 * Hard protection. > 5820 * If there is no reclaimable memory, OOM. > 5821 */ > 5822 continue; > 5823 } else if (mem_cgroup_below_low(target_memcg, memcg)) { > 5824 /* > 5825 * Soft protection. > 5826 * Respect the protection only as long as > 5827 * there is an unprotected supply > 5828 * of reclaimable memory from other cgroups. > 5829 */ > 5830 if (!sc->memcg_low_reclaim) { > 5831 sc->memcg_low_skipped = 1; > 5832 continue; > 5833 } > 5834 memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_LOW); > 5835 } > 5836 > 5837 reclaimed = sc->nr_reclaimed; > 5838 scanned = sc->nr_scanned; > 5839 > 5840 shrink_lruvec(lruvec, sc); > 5841 > 5842 shrink_slab(sc->gfp_mask, pgdat->node_id, memcg, > 5843 sc->priority); > 5844 > > 5845 trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end(memcg, > 5846 sc->nr_reclaimed - reclaimed); > 5847 > 5848 /* Record the group's reclaim efficiency */ > 5849 if (!sc->proactive) > 5850 vmpressure(sc->gfp_mask, memcg, false, > 5851 sc->nr_scanned - scanned, > 5852 sc->nr_reclaimed - reclaimed); > 5853 > 5854 } while ((memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(target_memcg, memcg, NULL))); > 5855 } > 5856 > > -- > 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service > https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki -- Thank you, Dmitry ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg [not found] <20231101102837.25205-3-ddrokosov@salutedevices.com> 2023-11-01 15:44 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg kernel test robot @ 2023-11-02 4:03 ` kernel test robot 1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: kernel test robot @ 2023-11-02 4:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dmitry Rokosov, rostedt, mhiramat, hannes, mhocko, roman.gushchin, shakeelb, muchun.song, akpm Cc: oe-kbuild-all, kernel, rockosov, cgroups, linux-mm, linux-kernel, bpf, Dmitry Rokosov Hi Dmitry, kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: [auto build test ERROR on akpm-mm/mm-everything] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Dmitry-Rokosov/mm-memcg-print-out-cgroup-name-in-the-memcg-tracepoints/20231101-183040 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-everything patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231101102837.25205-3-ddrokosov%40salutedevices.com patch subject: [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg config: sh-allnoconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231102/202311021126.DNKIAcbq-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: sh4-linux-gcc (GCC) 13.2.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231102/202311021126.DNKIAcbq-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202311021126.DNKIAcbq-lkp@intel.com/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): mm/vmscan.c: In function 'shrink_node_memcgs': >> mm/vmscan.c:5811:17: error: implicit declaration of function 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin'; did you mean 'trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] 5811 | trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin(memcg, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active mm/vmscan.c:5845:17: error: implicit declaration of function 'trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end'; did you mean 'trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] 5845 | trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end(memcg, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active cc1: some warnings being treated as errors vim +5811 mm/vmscan.c 5791 5792 static void shrink_node_memcgs(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) 5793 { 5794 struct mem_cgroup *target_memcg = sc->target_mem_cgroup; 5795 struct mem_cgroup *memcg; 5796 5797 memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(target_memcg, NULL, NULL); 5798 do { 5799 struct lruvec *lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(memcg, pgdat); 5800 unsigned long reclaimed; 5801 unsigned long scanned; 5802 5803 /* 5804 * This loop can become CPU-bound when target memcgs 5805 * aren't eligible for reclaim - either because they 5806 * don't have any reclaimable pages, or because their 5807 * memory is explicitly protected. Avoid soft lockups. 5808 */ 5809 cond_resched(); 5810 > 5811 trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_begin(memcg, 5812 sc->order, 5813 sc->gfp_mask); 5814 5815 mem_cgroup_calculate_protection(target_memcg, memcg); 5816 5817 if (mem_cgroup_below_min(target_memcg, memcg)) { 5818 /* 5819 * Hard protection. 5820 * If there is no reclaimable memory, OOM. 5821 */ 5822 continue; 5823 } else if (mem_cgroup_below_low(target_memcg, memcg)) { 5824 /* 5825 * Soft protection. 5826 * Respect the protection only as long as 5827 * there is an unprotected supply 5828 * of reclaimable memory from other cgroups. 5829 */ 5830 if (!sc->memcg_low_reclaim) { 5831 sc->memcg_low_skipped = 1; 5832 continue; 5833 } 5834 memcg_memory_event(memcg, MEMCG_LOW); 5835 } 5836 5837 reclaimed = sc->nr_reclaimed; 5838 scanned = sc->nr_scanned; 5839 5840 shrink_lruvec(lruvec, sc); 5841 5842 shrink_slab(sc->gfp_mask, pgdat->node_id, memcg, 5843 sc->priority); 5844 5845 trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_shrink_end(memcg, 5846 sc->nr_reclaimed - reclaimed); 5847 5848 /* Record the group's reclaim efficiency */ 5849 if (!sc->proactive) 5850 vmpressure(sc->gfp_mask, memcg, false, 5851 sc->nr_scanned - scanned, 5852 sc->nr_reclaimed - reclaimed); 5853 5854 } while ((memcg = mem_cgroup_iter(target_memcg, memcg, NULL))); 5855 } 5856 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-11-02 4:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20231101102837.25205-3-ddrokosov@salutedevices.com>
2023-11-01 15:44 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: memcg: introduce new event to trace shrink_memcg kernel test robot
2023-11-01 17:53 ` Dmitry Rokosov
2023-11-02 4:03 ` kernel test robot
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).