[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20181108145239.f8249da5833974bad286fb78@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 14:52:39 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com>
Cc: Chintan Pandya <cpandya@...eaurora.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm:vmalloc add vm_struct for vm_map_ram
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 19:14:49 +0800 Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com> wrote:
> There is no caller and pages information etc for the area which is
> created by vm_map_ram as well as the page count > VMAP_MAX_ALLOC.
> Add them on in this commit.
Well I can kind of see what this is doing - it increases the amount of
info in /proc/vmallocinfo for regions which were created by
vm_map_area(), yes?
But I'd like to hear it in your words, please. What problem are we
trying to solve? Why is it actually a problem? Why is the additional
information considered useful, etc?
It would help a lot if the changelog were to include before-and-after
examples from the /proc/vmallocinfo output.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists