Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752758AbbHTTuE (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 20 Aug 2015 15:50:04 -0400
Received: from mail-pa0-f47.google.com ([209.85.220.47]:33297 "EHLO
	mail-pa0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752151AbbHTTuC (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 20 Aug 2015 15:50:02 -0400
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 12:49:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
cc: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?J=C3=B6rn_Engel?= <joern@purestorage.com>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <nao.horiguchi@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] mm: hugetlb: proc: add HugetlbPages field to
 /proc/PID/status
In-Reply-To: <20150820110004.GB4632@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1508201249010.27169@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
References: <20150812000336.GB32192@hori1.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp> <1440059182-19798-1-git-send-email-n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> <1440059182-19798-3-git-send-email-n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com> <20150820110004.GB4632@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.10 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 885
Lines: 20

On Thu, 20 Aug 2015, Michal Hocko wrote:

> On Thu 20-08-15 08:26:27, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > Currently there's no easy way to get per-process usage of hugetlb pages,
> 
> Is this really the case after your previous patch? You have both 
> HugetlbPages and KernelPageSize which should be sufficient no?
> 
> Reading a single file is, of course, easier but is it really worth the
> additional code? I haven't really looked at the patch so I might be
> missing something but what would be an advantage over reading
> /proc/<pid>/smaps and extracting the information from there?
> 

/proc/pid/smaps requires root, /proc/pid/status doesn't.
--
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/