From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0016.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10FBD3128D9; Mon, 24 Nov 2025 15:15:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763997316; cv=none; b=ZTQBOGcScVlaVDrsrYWYLysO2cI3USUiU8WT5BM2c2F4AlF5/Iq+LsixWLZEt4jEaS0sJeE4HnZnAvkCqbeMFaCDgPaoFV0gXNFsN3VZ4E+eRozQSXre8B60REq+7t/2C5BnEADuALRLV4nRuXZ2vngNcj8nze+c8uCwJnk7pbg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763997316; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wbsUIStRu/I8l+W7EEAADPQP6bZYzpJBz5TxnbpLenw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=LxH28SUnNSHIdBUZw1MbOjBvAzYXSn2EmYvU8XU3DlF9OlwDB8BG+Z0NKd0tQAj0KVxOlWc/5Ga/3YQI353Y8FWslEW2ZZyj67loF6fPvR4O/G2TOC5e/0RjM+F+J44/n1+FMWLVvKkCtXpAh0IAzOsMtTE5k4tKaHu6JUESnYg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org Received: from omf16.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D7021305FE; Mon, 24 Nov 2025 15:15:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: rostedt@goodmis.org) by omf16.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 916DB2001C; Mon, 24 Nov 2025 15:15:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2025 10:15:45 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: SeongJae Park Cc: Andrew Morton , Masami Hiramatsu , Mathieu Desnoyers , damon@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] mm/damon/core: add trace point for damos stat per apply interval Message-ID: <20251124101545.0250445c@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20251123184329.85287-13-sj@kernel.org> References: <20251123184329.85287-1-sj@kernel.org> <20251123184329.85287-13-sj@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.20.0git84 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspamout08 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 916DB2001C X-Stat-Signature: amgdopewak89z9b311nn95u1tetxutom X-Session-Marker: 726F737465647440676F6F646D69732E6F7267 X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX18mhiH+8yhU3rLNz0uC4XgLk5UTtfo2JA0= X-HE-Tag: 1763997304-799272 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX1+nRZEW3e6XwJCJw6tJDlTKHwyHh7MykKmgcEJOcruyi41RFB+KBqDeklnJ8td/Dao+47YI27tMFW18xY7bwX7sLkzK1IIT689x9RsrYeGaP3UUFuTL04sSMlYXa+Ce41PehX79Q2WGOMbgNtPvvxOoMp44prXMClJZ/utaM5/rtQ+wkE6fnJrcCI9aEnee8FIgEtEENWxsH5teOKLh3CVKGD/PL3jKQqaWrRw7umcNDuXejN0GQqre+e1tsMIxI05twQiF+lCh0mdon2sr4k8AasnaZvGoSJwdgQPnGF5WkCU20LW7Ab7EQAjo9K9647YCoQYb7jX9ckSn+MjKVbGw On Sun, 23 Nov 2025 10:43:26 -0800 SeongJae Park wrote: > --- a/mm/damon/core.c > +++ b/mm/damon/core.c > @@ -2256,6 +2256,19 @@ static void damos_adjust_quota(struct damon_ctx *c, struct damos *s) > quota->min_score = score; > } > > +static void damos_trace_stat(struct damon_ctx *c, struct damos *s) > +{ > + unsigned int cidx = 0, sidx = 0; > + struct damos *siter; > + > + damon_for_each_scheme(siter, c) { > + if (siter == s) > + break; > + sidx++; > + } > + trace_damos_stat_after_apply_interval(cidx, sidx, &s->stat); > +} > + > static void kdamond_apply_schemes(struct damon_ctx *c) > { > struct damon_target *t; > @@ -2294,6 +2307,8 @@ static void kdamond_apply_schemes(struct damon_ctx *c) > (s->apply_interval_us ? s->apply_interval_us : > c->attrs.aggr_interval) / sample_interval; > s->last_applied = NULL; > + if (trace_damos_stat_after_apply_interval_enabled()) > + damos_trace_stat(c, s); > } > mutex_unlock(&c->walk_control_lock); > } I wonder if the above would look better (and still produce good assembly) if it was: static inline void damos_trace_stat(struct damon_ctx *c, struct damos *s) { unsigned int cidx = 0, sidx = 0; struct damos *siter; if (!trace_damos_stat_after_apply_interval_enabled()) return; damon_for_each_scheme(siter, c) { if (siter == s) break; sidx++; } trace_damos_stat_after_apply_interval(cidx, sidx, &s->stat); } static void kdamond_apply_schemes(struct damon_ctx *c) { struct damon_target *t; > @@ -2294,6 +2307,8 @@ static void kdamond_apply_schemes(struct damon_ctx *c) (s->apply_interval_us ? s->apply_interval_us : c->attrs.aggr_interval) / sample_interval; s->last_applied = NULL; damos_trace_stat(c, s); } mutex_unlock(&c->walk_control_lock); } I have no real preference. I just think keeping the "if ()" statement out of the main code as a more aesthetic look. But the above should be equivalent in actual functionality. -- Steve