Re: [Patch] mm tracepoints

Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-06T17:38:55Z

On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 18:10 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Looks pretty good and useful to me. I've Cc:-ed more mm folks,
> it would be nice to hear their opinion about these tracepoints.
>
> Andrew, Nick, Peter, what do you think?

Bit sad we use the struct mm_struct * as mm identifier (little %lx vs %p
confusion there too), but I suppose there simply isn't anything better.

Exposing kernel pointers like that might upset some of the security
folks, not sure if I care though.

I'm missing the fault_filemap_read counterpart of fault_anon_pgin.

Once you have anon/filemap symmetric, you might consider folding these
and doing the anon argument thing you do elsewhere.

Initially I was thinking we lacked the kswapd vs direct reclaim
information on the pgout data, but since we log the pid:comm for each
event...

Which brings us to mm_pdflush_*, we can already see its pdflush from
pid:comm, then again, it fits the naming style. Same for
mm_directreclaim*() - we already know its direct, since its not kswapd
doing it.

Finally, we have page_free, but not page_alloc? Oh, it is there, just
not in the obvious place.

Things missing, we trace unmap, but not mmap, mprotect, mlock?

pagelock perhaps?