Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 Apr 2007 23:55:45 -0700 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/13] maps: pagemap, kpagemap, and related cleanups |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote: >> Do a full pagetable walk, with all the associated locking from within >> a systemtap script? I'd be surprised. Maybe if it's mostly hand-coded >> in C, perhaps. Then you just end up with the same thing, don't you?
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 01:40:08PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > And my problem isn't with the hardcoded pagetable walker. Yeah, we'd > probably still keep the pagetable callback walker thingy with Matt's > associated cleanups (and my subsequent ones to clean it up more and > move it to mm/): there are other in-kernel users for that anyway. > The point is the proc API, and exposing random little parts of deep > kernel internals that some people happen to find useful at the time. > (which is why we have an incredible proliferation of these things). > With systemtap scripts, you could walk pagetables and print *the exact > page information you want*, or you could walk pfns, or LRU, or page_tree, > or walk the page tree then the rmap structures. And you can selectively > cull out items you don't care about if you only care about a subset of > items, based on arbitrary criteria. And you can most likely do all that > more efficiently than with a conglomeration of various /proc files > (assuming they even provide what you want in the first place).
The EM guys are unwilling or unable for support-oriented reasons to deal with anything but unmodified kernels as shipped by distros.
-- wli - 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/
| |