Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Message-ID: <100d8ba9-80e4-4ba8-0568-a77f0dbd4f78@openvz.org>
Date:   Mon, 23 May 2022 07:03:36 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] tracing: add 'accounted' entry into output of
 allocation tracepoints
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc:     Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, kernel@openvz.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
References: <0c73ce5c-3625-6187-820e-1277e168b3bc@openvz.org>
 <a1e54672-d824-3ee1-cb68-9ceaa46fc70f@openvz.org>
 <YomzXwN9rvCGAZJ0@n2.us-central1-a.c.spheric-algebra-350919.internal>
 <1621d82a-439d-0657-2b7e-5e90c42c2087@openvz.org>
 <20220522160943.5e5950e0@gandalf.local.home>
From:   Vasily Averin <vvs@openvz.org>
In-Reply-To: <20220522160943.5e5950e0@gandalf.local.home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 5/22/22 23:09, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sun, 22 May 2022 07:33:08 +0300
> Vasily Averin <vvs@openvz.org> wrote:
> 
>>> slab_flags=SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT|SLAB_ACCOUNT|SLAB_STORE_USER
>>> instead of just printing 'accounted=true/false'. This patch is too
>>> specific to SLAB_ACCOUNT.  
>>
>> Any extra output degrades performance.
>> For my task it's not important to know SLAB flags, I just need to understand,
>> is current allocation accounted or not.
> 
> If you do save the flags in the event, you can report that on output with
> the __print_flags() macro:
> 
>  TP_fast_assign(
> 	[..]
> 	__entry->sflags = s ? s->flags;
> 	[..]
>  )
>  TP_printk("... slab_flags=%s ..",
> 	[..]
> 	__print_flags(sflags, "|",
> 		{ SLAB_CONSISTENCY_CHECKS, "CONSISTENCY_CHECKS" },
> 		{ SLAB_RED_ZONE, "RED_ZONE" },
> 		{ SLAB_POISON, "POISON" },
> 		{ SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, "HWCACHE_ALIGN" },
> 		{ SLAB_CACHE_DMA, "CACHE_DMA" },
> 		{ SLAB_CACHE_DMA32, "CACHE_DMA32" },
> 		{ SLAB_STORE_USER, "STORE_USER" },
> 		{ SLAB_PANIC, "PANIC" }), ... )
> 
> 
> And you get the flag output looking nicely, and all the processing is done
> on the reader path.
> 
> That's if you find it useful at all.

Thank you for explanation!
Yes, we can do it however I really doubt that any other slab flags are of interest to anyone.

Btw. in this form slab flags array causes sparse warnings,
because SLAB_* are defined as bitwise slab_flags_t.
This should be translated to unsigned long similarly to gfp_t flags.

Thank you,
	Vasily Averin