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]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FB79C48BF6 for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 07:44:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id DD8106B0095; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 02:44:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id D88806B0096; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 02:44:13 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id C29496B0098; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 02:44:13 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E296B0095 for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 02:44:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin26.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46531A098B for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 07:44:13 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81815022786.26.4B1E82A Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.223.131]) by imf10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38F21C0005 for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 07:44:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf10.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=DEJL3B37; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=DEJL3B37; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass (imf10.hostedemail.com: domain of mhocko@suse.com designates 195.135.223.131 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mhocko@suse.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1708501451; 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:dkim-signature; bh=n/QEk4HUS4tR1rBRcACEpzWgLgUlK+CJgCIzsVAuTmA=; b=HeOEHa81pLMZkBS/NwzBQKPVmnbcfRwFl8i8b3YcqAIzQ/4Oqaeh8TMhj5bOrmi+gdCEzx WW8/oezR+YE4j7uBE2AHztSO74Eg54PWKhU3WgU6c5dgKyWhlYk2sePACh16Tf1VRv4jOl Uw9PFPoGvlvxbYJ9dDQ2Tgoq/Ssz7A4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf10.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=DEJL3B37; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=DEJL3B37; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass (imf10.hostedemail.com: domain of mhocko@suse.com designates 195.135.223.131 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mhocko@suse.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1708501451; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=7D9Ziep0vUhus+zxubf0QJcpbUCThjxFam4SB1l3sEwzYN7WpJhzO8KTZgjHFhqpnzuwPe wkFWW1uGvRDd5Ig5x/lQS4kxAzHhXV+fST4fuktUdS0xBV22827hcHGvXKD08Bv5Z9XR1W 6YMzSAObvde+y5b4hJv23ailXHrNRIY= Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [10.150.64.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84DBC1FB46; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 07:44:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1708501449; h=from:from:reply-to: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=n/QEk4HUS4tR1rBRcACEpzWgLgUlK+CJgCIzsVAuTmA=; b=DEJL3B37JhVkcQM8p6IeKRxEpLWZNprAWiP1qFyGeA7IST671NnPj1zW1Gc5x2S9Yzw8d5 EdRekehg1awR2rbCDDyCZ+oqEo6tJjO+rCrQA8hvOg6XWldFQ4Og59WszoLc7CzvBOTSp7 ARHr4dgNhkfOrXk/7bYEx32yhP/1RLU= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1708501449; h=from:from:reply-to: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=n/QEk4HUS4tR1rBRcACEpzWgLgUlK+CJgCIzsVAuTmA=; b=DEJL3B37JhVkcQM8p6IeKRxEpLWZNprAWiP1qFyGeA7IST671NnPj1zW1Gc5x2S9Yzw8d5 EdRekehg1awR2rbCDDyCZ+oqEo6tJjO+rCrQA8hvOg6XWldFQ4Og59WszoLc7CzvBOTSp7 ARHr4dgNhkfOrXk/7bYEx32yhP/1RLU= Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65BD113A69; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 07:44:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id MYn8Fcmp1WV9HAAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Wed, 21 Feb 2024 07:44:09 +0000 Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 08:44:08 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Bixuan Cui Cc: Steven Rostedt , akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhiramat@kernel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, opensource.kernel@vivo.com Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v6 0/2] Make memory reclamation measurable Message-ID: References: <20240105013607.2868-1-cuibixuan@vivo.com> <20240220212202.59ddc123@gandalf.local.home> <3d4f44ee-f533-446f-a9e6-7f58afc78d65@vivo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3d4f44ee-f533-446f-a9e6-7f58afc78d65@vivo.com> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 38F21C0005 X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 X-Stat-Signature: q7h841abxhmhsz78mhjbmckzzi4ibema X-HE-Tag: 1708501450-477245 X-HE-Meta: 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 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.025524, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed 21-02-24 11:00:53, Bixuan Cui wrote: > > > 在 2024/2/21 10:22, Steven Rostedt 写道: > > It's up to the memory management folks to decide on this. -- Steve > Noted with thanks. It would be really helpful to have more details on why we need those trace points. It is my understanding that you would like to have a more fine grained numbers for the time duration of different parts of the reclaim process. I can imagine this could be useful in some cases but is it useful enough and for a wider variety of workloads? Is that worth a dedicated static tracepoints? Why an add-hoc dynamic tracepoints or BPF for a very special situation is not sufficient? In other words, tell us more about the usecases and why is this generally useful. Thanks! -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs