From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1892AFF887E for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 14:52:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 41A796B0095; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 10:52:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 3F25A6B0096; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 10:52:42 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 3302A6B0099; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 10:52:42 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 204B06B0095 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 10:52:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin03.hostedemail.com (lb01a-stub [10.200.18.249]) by unirelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CE4C1202BB for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 14:52:41 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 84711884922.03.22A7BEB Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (unirelay04 [10.200.18.67]) by imf17.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E1ED40002 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 14:52:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf17.hostedemail.com; none ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1777474359; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ugLM90Y7kk2DtlyF/mpf/bYg72pvvzvli6x4UgzHxtM=; b=UrAB2B1y/ZO+uCMYGedXDSO5TwJi/fPNIeUPr+AxaPSAOOOLf7DKR2AY8Y7ru/vzxkF3ph H4IlXip3aFSXa1aZkqH455KQeSFqHFfzyf6s2D8pZMB+j7dhtIYk921moGQS+wbIng2lCl zot33mrAgyZvBNoJ305Zowh3g9veRok= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf17.hostedemail.com; none ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1777474359; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=PjzGRzCcr4q29G0J70VLCdkov0mkx+rDPL4R7g6kAR+mbzLZbdHcRICfg8vyHtCjIuzH3p ujV+SQVnOepi9YuUpddjQyxUShEmmj0fpABg4lKvi3KE+k9HodXh3ZNhIu4/OupRkygDLn s3BHf3X5Sa5ioT0pwtEIjKw8uAiwHj4= Received: from omf06.hostedemail.com (lb01a-stub [10.200.18.249]) by unirelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B933C1A0313; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 14:52:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: rostedt@goodmis.org) by omf06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A344B20011; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 14:52:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2026 10:52:45 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: SUVONOV BUNYOD Cc: akpm , vbabka , linux-mm , mhiramat , mathieu desnoyers , linux-trace-kernel , linux-kernel , surenb , mhocko , jackmanb , hannes , ziy , david , vishal moola , corbet , skhan , linux-doc Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/page_alloc: trace PCP refills and PCP zone lock usage Message-ID: <20260429105245.192e67a8@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <1453063691.2584758.1777433513691.JavaMail.zimbra@sjtu.edu.cn> References: <20260425091335.346504-1-b.suvonov@sjtu.edu.cn> <20260427060142.131055-1-b.suvonov@sjtu.edu.cn> <20260428142335.3bca0166@gandalf.local.home> <1453063691.2584758.1777433513691.JavaMail.zimbra@sjtu.edu.cn> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.20.0git84 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Session-Marker: 726F737465647440676F6F646D69732E6F7267 X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX1/gO+H3IUx7sVHTPg/bx8A4FuIpjf3S24k= X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX1+bnbMuIeHV/UgJRUTOQxB6W5jOfn2Q0Tl/AkipVunZIoaSus3NWsVFId/CmDr8sy/VbnbG0pb/aIuMKsaKG1AeCyOC/v2A6T77ZyfIyT6VlTgf3ir5WFPnCzA+5p/LxM4uwNTx/t9CpfKW/bnRveONJSermvPB4/FoeRuVsFOmIgHwKUpLPtgfbLZj+FDkjYxsu7bchL/K2FcDIAq3ncdRKe8Dfc+R7VOLqVpUjNNDZEZfuuPD0rvxQsRxH0kK+nHQXABXhdOHwXmrCMyxfmtNcdCIC/XtQuEAHr5n76QSzc3c63+1BK6s X-Stat-Signature: hkat18xezybbqk5dyxadixumtmrtrta1 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 6E1ED40002 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag-Orig: 1777474348-817918 X-HE-Tag: 1777474359-612947 X-HE-Meta: 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 NTKgAlKW UvijOtYx1riK6MCodfuvICiStI8GCV805vRB+WO9ggUBpkBQ= Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, 29 Apr 2026 11:31:53 +0800 (CST) SUVONOV BUNYOD wrote: > Thanks for reviewing Steven, > > >Why this change? It makes it much harder to understand. > > > >The above is not a normal macro. Ignore any checkpatch warnings about it. > >The proper way to do the TP_STRUCT__entry() is to make it just like a struct: > > > >struct { > > unsigned long pfn; > > unsigned int order; > > int migratetype; > >}; > > > >Thus, the macro should be: > > > > TP_STRUCT__entry( > > __field( unsigned long, pfn ) > > __field( unsigned int, order ) > > __field( int, migratetype ) > > ), > > > Yeah sorry for the formatting issue, will fix in v3. Any other concerns? > What do you think about the introduction of those tracepoints themselves? > It's a basic tracepoint and nothing unusual about it. I only watch over how tracepoints are created and some use cases and make sure they are done properly. But the introduction of tracepoints in other subsystems are up to the maintainers of those subsystems. They are the ones that know what is useful or not. In other words, it's up to the MM subsystem maintainers to decide. -- Steve