[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220905181650.71e9d02c@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:16:50 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam.howlett@...cle.com>,
David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, mcgrof@...nel.org,
masahiroy@...nel.org, nathan@...nel.org, changbin.du@...el.com,
ytcoode@...il.com, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Benjamin Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>, 42.hyeyoo@...il.com,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>, arnd@...db.de,
jbaron@...mai.com, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...gle.com>,
Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>,
kernel-team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
linux-mm <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,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/30] Code tagging framework and applications
On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 16:42:29 -0400
Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev> wrote:
> > Haven't tried that yet but will do. Thanks for the reference code!
>
> Is it really worth the effort of benchmarking tracing API overhead here?
>
> The main cost of a tracing based approach is going to to be the data structure
> for remembering outstanding allocations so that free events can be matched to
> the appropriate callsite. Regardless of whether it's done with BFP or by
> attaching to the tracepoints directly, that's going to be the main overhead.
The point I was making here is that you do not need your own hooking
mechanism. You can get the information directly by attaching to the
tracepoint.
> > static void my_callback(void *data, unsigned long call_site,
> > const void *ptr, struct kmem_cache *s,
> > size_t bytes_req, size_t bytes_alloc,
> > gfp_t gfp_flags)
> > {
> > struct my_data_struct *my_data = data;
> >
> > { do whatever }
> > }
The "do whatever" is anything you want to do.
Or is the data structure you create with this approach going to be too much
overhead? How hard is it for a hash or binary search lookup?
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists