[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220901142345.agkfp2d5lijdp6pt@moria.home.lan>
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 10:23:45 -0400
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz, hannes@...xchg.org,
roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, dave@...olabs.net, willy@...radead.org,
liam.howlett@...cle.com, void@...ifault.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
ldufour@...ux.ibm.com, peterx@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
mcgrof@...nel.org, masahiroy@...nel.org, nathan@...nel.org,
changbin.du@...el.com, ytcoode@...il.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, bristot@...hat.com,
vschneid@...hat.com, cl@...ux.com, penberg@...nel.org,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, 42.hyeyoo@...il.com, glider@...gle.com,
elver@...gle.com, dvyukov@...gle.com, shakeelb@...gle.com,
songmuchun@...edance.com, arnd@...db.de, jbaron@...mai.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, minchan@...gle.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com,
kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/30] Code tagging framework and applications
On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 10:05:03AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 31.08.22 21:01, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 12:47:32PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> On Wed 31-08-22 11:19:48, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >>> Whatever asking for an explanation as to why equivalent functionality
> >>> cannot not be created from ftrace/kprobe/eBPF/whatever is reasonable.
> >>
> >> Fully agreed and this is especially true for a change this size
> >> 77 files changed, 3406 insertions(+), 703 deletions(-)
> >
> > In the case of memory allocation accounting, you flat cannot do this with ftrace
> > - you could maybe do a janky version that isn't fully accurate, much slower,
> > more complicated for the developer to understand and debug and more complicated
> > for the end user.
> >
> > But please, I invite anyone who's actually been doing this with ftrace to
> > demonstrate otherwise.
> >
> > Ftrace just isn't the right tool for the job here - we're talking about adding
> > per callsite accounting to some of the fastest fast paths in the kernel.
> >
> > And the size of the changes for memory allocation accounting are much more
> > reasonable:
> > 33 files changed, 623 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)
> >
> > The code tagging library should exist anyways, it's been open coded half a dozen
> > times in the kernel already.
>
> Hi Kent,
>
> independent of the other discussions, if it's open coded already, does
> it make sense to factor that already-open-coded part out independently
> of the remainder of the full series here?
It's discussed in the cover letter, that is exactly how the patch series is
structured.
> [I didn't immediately spot if this series also attempts already to
> replace that open-coded part]
Uh huh.
Honestly, some days it feels like lkml is just as bad as slashdot, with people
wanting to get in their two cents without actually reading...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists