Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:a841:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d1csp4158269pxy; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 20:31:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwugNAoyfSomv0rhOc5D6zo5JWfosWq42HC133VemV/NPYfgd43gu/woKAvKFkeLhYPkjhn X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:441:: with SMTP id p1mr1909186edw.298.1619494307506; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 20:31:47 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1619494307; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Dwob/MxPx+OIEr+nBFkJM2XqTtJT9V/e9p/LlZbhvfzsgOkdJtGLjy+/W6/+m0MqSB VJX4znUWgz40RztYLI2PIWW27veVpae3B+gBrET/lTkj8QgAc2Dgf0OvDjwxvgowWldk EfEz3c1CaXrKGgWJI2vx+PM5wUrVp6qByuGp9rUf3rYecoSl0iL4gzkTjKvWbX93DKme m8EyqxT6mUZVT3aFp8G0wQzUkUToa9uZVQyoXlOR7lDvWbH6VCXL7kfoVO+j7nduxMrD OYCJcbkuhEBGG5O1bP66bnBE5T4mWElXeUGSk6lpsIFT3SYBIJWd1hnC+U/Tz7BaQ6wu 77eg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=1/f4JVixSDUtfY05Md2NUGmbhN57QIb2bgma7dK5cAU=; b=zgJGGDr76NtuGsqfjbbolfPw1icXvnebNAB2+kqxmtykD/KjNoWOqM+RSOoGwUDmVk 03dZWTzO6LuA5LhUBaknydQx0e5B+icqdYYW6DJ73M4PXXgXbz0HbrZgbecWlxHXFPIA AJolA9frHobqk72kaalKps3UxtpTVkwthUF095T58f339Hpm9WAsjsiZKYHk2gSYDV9l cbAeddCaqIezeubN6dK5KkRMTAeuMO5Ch9/iLhL1xiaaYI7AREsNmyAnDlyCWe35IwV3 fHoBrLckttYfUDLmPv3JhY2QqpM6S0O/0LZVzioNfPz6R+H7tJH2E9eX0DxMlEg9J9ua WHww== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=Haegntx8; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id i6si1290381edv.142.2021.04.26.20.31.24; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 20:31:47 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=Haegntx8; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234406AbhD0DbE (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 26 Apr 2021 23:31:04 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50272 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234371AbhD0Day (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Apr 2021 23:30:54 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x134.google.com (mail-lf1-x134.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::134]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF160C06175F for ; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 20:30:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x134.google.com with SMTP id x19so61136985lfa.2 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 20:30:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1/f4JVixSDUtfY05Md2NUGmbhN57QIb2bgma7dK5cAU=; b=Haegntx8II71fsjo5ukch+sUDr23zEkF/J/qNEpVmmL/ZqvcJAgbctNfGpJt84CeSZ s+F+HfGj+q1ifZqOPXfc+7VWk5hLwGqnU8juAJQQfH+Xn5SKE0vNWjJdFF5F1QR2Q/w1 OyfyMhebqHwHBl5HlBwQEW7CiLECAp9E8DHt1Hzwf0Lo/swVjRdh/XAcGcADCZfF+nsq PIbUmWmumb6wh3R4L9iBUBN63IqsRpM/GOmJWWH/YmHgpdzE9nYmZXpAvI4IEc2ps2UZ 94b2pzL49zWIfq5Mtd9HSyL7gDz9sBK3YyJjVSkvX4lFchmQ3JmTgAHc3iFQnYcWeSE7 6rKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1/f4JVixSDUtfY05Md2NUGmbhN57QIb2bgma7dK5cAU=; b=ahHU5M+uPotS2DinoYP5NY9bJ5O0OlrPGKox9rMUPpUi+JKiqTpWiDh09GgdAKYbLG C/JzIsmnYQvGQ/xIfcvPrtF81MqDcVmpddmtaKq/X0tvTevvPUGW2Tqn7rt+DJbY26tz bCOLaqh9r+XO/IrHvkVZYNURyQaG4n68EFyJrRwSCYVlcKeo87x4tXbmrKJ/gu93mten M1kOaq5gDtI5k0VbxDx2R0LWaNjegH2hGS3fnZEB3PWpUYCkKtIq4+v2orSvFDqeeOwb l1bTHy4Pn1gVVP+IlGtz30MQuHEXoSUZGhwaVCOyH50EisWpygCfWoZariBX32sFHOwR kCzQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5331HDOqiSQqPoe62morwKCBTaG+IEOYNJF+XcBb0nz4wpPv/wgo +hPGZE7zPWLLL7VWwiiN9Q9gquQJy4f0Km8YnlKA8SJn24DVMw== X-Received: by 2002:a19:f504:: with SMTP id j4mr2105098lfb.307.1619494208480; Mon, 26 Apr 2021 20:30:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1619491400-1904-1-git-send-email-sxwjean@me.com> <20210427025358.GV235567@casper.infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20210427025358.GV235567@casper.infradead.org> From: Xiongwei Song Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 11:29:32 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: append __GFP_COMP flag for trace_malloc To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Xiongwei Song , cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org, rientjes@google.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, vbabka@suse.cz, linux-mm@kvack.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 10:54 AM Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 10:43:20AM +0800, Xiongwei Song wrote: > > From: Xiongwei Song > > > > When calling kmalloc_order, the flags should include __GFP_COMP here, > > so that trace_malloc can trace the precise flags. > > I suppose that depends on your point of view. Correct. Should we report the > flags used by the caller, or the flags that we used to allocate memory? > And why does it matter? When I capture kmem:kmalloc events on my env with perf: (perf record -p my_pid -e kmem:kmalloc) I got the result below: 0.08% call_site=ffffffff851d0cb0 ptr=0xffff8c04a4ca0000 bytes_req=10176 bytes_alloc=16384 gfp_flags=GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC 0.08% call_site=ffffffff851d0cb0 ptr=0xffff8c04a4ca4000 bytes_req=10176 bytes_alloc=16384 gfp_flags=GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC 0.08% call_site=ffffffff851d0cb0 ptr=0xffff8c04a4ca8000 bytes_req=10176 bytes_alloc=16384 gfp_flags=GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC 0.08% call_site=ffffffff851d0cb0 ptr=0xffff8c04a6f80000 bytes_req=10176 bytes_alloc=16384 gfp_flags=GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC 0.08% call_site=ffffffff851d0cb0 ptr=0xffff8c04a6f84000 bytes_req=10176 bytes_alloc=16384 gfp_flags=GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC 0.08% call_site=ffffffff851d0cb0 ptr=0xffff8c04a6f88000 bytes_req=10176 bytes_alloc=16384 gfp_flags=GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC 0.08% call_site=ffffffff851d0cb0 ptr=0xffff8c04a6f8c000 bytes_req=10176 bytes_alloc=16384 gfp_flags=GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC 0.07% call_site=ffffffff851d0cb0 ptr=0xffff8c04a4c80000 bytes_req=10176 bytes_alloc=16384 gfp_flags=GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC The value of gfp_flags made me confused, I spent some time to find out which trace_malloc is here. So I think we should append __GFP_COMP. Regards