[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0842738c-1c6f-9a29-b9a6-21e5af898c31@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 11:25:21 -0800
From: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>, kernel-team@...com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: show stats for non-default hugepage sizes in
/proc/meminfo
On 11/13/2017 11:10 AM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 06:45:01PM +0000, Roman Gushchin wrote:
>> Or, at least, some total counter, e.g. how much memory is consumed
>> by hugetlb pages?
>
> I'm not a big fan of the verbose breakdown for every huge page size.
> As others have pointed out such detail exists elswhere.
>
> But I do think we should have a summary counter for memory consumed by
> hugetlb that lets you know how much is missing from MemTotal. This can
> be large parts of overall memory, and right now /proc/meminfo will
> give the impression we are leaking those pages.
>
> Maybe a simple summary counter for everything set aside by the hugetlb
> subsystem - default and non-default page sizes, whether they're used
> or only reserved etc.?
>
> Hugetlb 12345 kB
I would prefer this approach. The 'trick' is coming up with a name or
description that is not confusing. Unfortunately, we have to leave the
existing entries. So, this new entry will be greater than or equal to
HugePages_Total. :( I guess Hugetlb is as good of a name as any?
--
Mike Kravetz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists