linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/7] mm, vmscan: show LRU name in mm_vmscan_lru

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170103205244.GD13873@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Tue, 3 Jan 2017 21:52:44 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] mm, vmscan: show LRU name in mm_vmscan_lru_isolate
 tracepoint

On Tue 03-01-17 21:47:45, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 03-01-17 18:08:58, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > On 12/28/2016 04:30 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> > > 
> > > mm_vmscan_lru_isolate currently prints only whether the LRU we isolate
> > > from is file or anonymous but we do not know which LRU this is. It is
> > > useful to know whether the list is file or anonymous as well. Change
> > > the tracepoint to show symbolic names of the lru rather.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> > > ---
> > >  include/trace/events/vmscan.h | 20 ++++++++++++++------
> > >  mm/vmscan.c                   |  2 +-
> > >  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/include/trace/events/vmscan.h b/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
> > > index 6af4dae46db2..cc0b4c456c78 100644
> > > --- a/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
> > > +++ b/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
> > > @@ -36,6 +36,14 @@
> > >  		(RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC) \
> > >  	)
> > > 
> > > +#define show_lru_name(lru) \
> > > +	__print_symbolic(lru, \
> > > +			{LRU_INACTIVE_ANON, "LRU_INACTIVE_ANON"}, \
> > > +			{LRU_ACTIVE_ANON, "LRU_ACTIVE_ANON"}, \
> > > +			{LRU_INACTIVE_FILE, "LRU_INACTIVE_FILE"}, \
> > > +			{LRU_ACTIVE_FILE, "LRU_ACTIVE_FILE"}, \
> > > +			{LRU_UNEVICTABLE, "LRU_UNEVICTABLE"})
> > > +
> > 
> > Does this work with external tools such as trace-cmd, i.e. does it export
> > the correct format file?
> 
> How do I find out?

Well, I've just checked the format file and it says
print fmt: "isolate_mode=%d classzone=%d order=%d nr_requested=%lu nr_scanned=%lu nr_skipped=%lu nr_taken=%lu lru=%s", REC->isolate_mode, REC->classzone_idx, REC->order, REC->nr_requested, REC->nr_scanned, REC->nr_skipped, REC->nr_taken, __print_symbolic(REC->lru, {LRU_INACTIVE_ANON, "LRU_INACTIVE_ANON"}, {LRU_ACTIVE_ANON, "LRU_ACTIVE_ANON"}, {LRU_INACTIVE_FILE, "LRU_INACTIVE_FILE"}, {LRU_ACTIVE_FILE, "LRU_ACTIVE_FILE"}, {LRU_UNEVICTABLE, "LRU_UNEVICTABLE"})

So the tool should be OK as long as it can find values for LRU_*
constants. Is this what is the problem?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs