Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934275Ab3CZIi3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Mar 2013 04:38:29 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:23862 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933964Ab3CZIi1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Mar 2013 04:38:27 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,911,1355126400"; d="scan'208";a="311972671" From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: Dave Hansen Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andrea Arcangeli , Andrew Morton , Al Viro , Hugh Dickins , Wu Fengguang , Jan Kara , Mel Gorman , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andi Kleen , Matthew Wilcox , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Hillf Danton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <514B4A9F.5090004@sr71.net> References: <1363283435-7666-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <1363283435-7666-13-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <514B4A9F.5090004@sr71.net> Subject: Re: [PATCHv2, RFC 12/30] thp, mm: add event counters for huge page alloc on write to a file Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20130326084012.CEF0AE0085@blue.fi.intel.com> Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 10:40:12 +0200 (EET) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1327 Lines: 34 Dave Hansen wrote: > On 03/14/2013 10:50 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > --- a/include/linux/vm_event_item.h > > +++ b/include/linux/vm_event_item.h > > @@ -71,6 +71,8 @@ enum vm_event_item { PGPGIN, PGPGOUT, PSWPIN, PSWPOUT, > > THP_FAULT_FALLBACK, > > THP_COLLAPSE_ALLOC, > > THP_COLLAPSE_ALLOC_FAILED, > > + THP_WRITE_ALLOC, > > + THP_WRITE_FAILED, > > THP_SPLIT, > > THP_ZERO_PAGE_ALLOC, > > THP_ZERO_PAGE_ALLOC_FAILED, > > I think these names are a bit terse. It's certainly not _writes_ that > are failing and "THP_WRITE_FAILED" makes it sound that way. Right. s/THP_WRITE_FAILED/THP_WRITE_ALLOC_FAILED/ > Also, why do we need to differentiate these from the existing anon-hugepage > vm stats? The alloc_pages() call seems to be doing the exact same thing in > the end. Is one more likely to succeed than the other? Existing stats specify source of thp page: fault or collapse. When we allocate a new huge page with write(2) it's nither fault nor collapse. I think it's reasonable to introduce new type of event for that. -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/