Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/7 v2] vm, vmscan: enahance vmscan tracepoints | From | Vlastimil Babka <> | Date | Thu, 5 Jan 2017 09:25:07 +0100 |
| |
On 01/04/2017 11:19 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > Hi, > this is the second version of the patchset [1]. I hope I've addressed all > the review feedback. > > While debugging [2] I've realized that there is some room for > improvements in the tracepoints set we offer currently. I had hard times > to make any conclusion from the existing ones. The resulting problem > turned out to be active list aging [3] and we are missing at least two > tracepoints to debug such a problem. > > Some existing tracepoints could export more information to see _why_ the > reclaim progress cannot be made not only _how much_ we could reclaim. > The later could be seen quite reasonably from the vmstat counters > already. It can be argued that we are showing too many implementation > details in those tracepoints but I consider them way too lowlevel > already to be usable by any kernel independent userspace. I would be > _really_ surprised if anything but debugging tools have used them. > > Any feedback is highly appreciated.
When patch-specific feedback is addressed, then for the whole series:
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161228153032.10821-1-mhocko@kernel.org > [2] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161215225702.GA27944@boerne.fritz.box > [3] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161223105157.GB23109@dhcp22.suse.cz > >
| |