[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090428091034.GL27382@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:10:34 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu <eduard.munteanu@...ux360.ro>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] proc: export more page flags in /proc/kpageflags
> Yes, zero overhead is important for certain things (like
> CONFIG_SLUB_STATS, for example). However, putting slab allocator
> specific checks in fs/proc looks pretty fragile to me. It would be nice
Ok, perhaps that could be put into a inline into slab.h. Would
that address your concerns?
> Also, while you probably don't want to use tracepoints for this kind of
> instrumentation, you might want to look into reusing the ftrace
> reporting bits.
There's already perfectly fine code in tree for this, I don't see why it would
need another infrastructure that doesn't really fit anyways.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists