[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZFKmxVXlk9xkQoPB@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Wed, 3 May 2023 08:24:05 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, vbabka@...e.cz, hannes@...xchg.org,
roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, mgorman@...e.de, dave@...olabs.net,
willy@...radead.org, liam.howlett@...cle.com, corbet@....net,
void@...ifault.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
ldufour@...ux.ibm.com, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
arnd@...db.de, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, peterx@...hat.com,
david@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, mcgrof@...nel.org,
masahiroy@...nel.org, nathan@...nel.org, dennis@...nel.org,
muchun.song@...ux.dev, rppt@...nel.org, paulmck@...nel.org,
pasha.tatashin@...een.com, yosryahmed@...gle.com,
yuzhao@...gle.com, dhowells@...hat.com, hughd@...gle.com,
andreyknvl@...il.com, keescook@...omium.org,
ndesaulniers@...gle.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
ebiggers@...gle.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, jbaron@...mai.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, minchan@...gle.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com,
kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/40] Memory allocation profiling
Hello,
On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 01:51:23PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> Do you have example output?
Not right now. It's from many months ago. It's just a script I could find
easily.
> TBH I'm skeptical that it's even possible to do full memory allocation
> profiling with tracing/bpf, due to recursive memory allocations and
> needing an index of outstanding allcations.
There are some issues e.g. w/ lossy updates which should be fixed from BPF
side but we do run BPF on every single packet and IO on most of our
machines, so basing this argument on whether tracking all memory allocations
from BPF is possible is probably not a winning strategy for this proposal.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists