Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm: page_alloc: Reduce object size by neatening printks | From | Joe Perches <> | Date | Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:37:56 -0700 |
| |
On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 20:30 +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (03/15/17 18:43), Joe Perches wrote: > [..] > > - printk("active_anon:%lu inactive_anon:%lu isolated_anon:%lu\n" > > - " active_file:%lu inactive_file:%lu isolated_file:%lu\n" > > - " unevictable:%lu dirty:%lu writeback:%lu unstable:%lu\n" > > - " slab_reclaimable:%lu slab_unreclaimable:%lu\n" > > - " mapped:%lu shmem:%lu pagetables:%lu bounce:%lu\n" > > - " free:%lu free_pcp:%lu free_cma:%lu\n", > > - global_node_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_ANON), > > - global_node_page_state(NR_INACTIVE_ANON), > > - global_node_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_ANON), > > - global_node_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_FILE), > > - global_node_page_state(NR_INACTIVE_FILE), > > - global_node_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_FILE), > > - global_node_page_state(NR_UNEVICTABLE), > > - global_node_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY), > > - global_node_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK), > > - global_node_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS), > > - global_page_state(NR_SLAB_RECLAIMABLE), > > - global_page_state(NR_SLAB_UNRECLAIMABLE), > > - global_node_page_state(NR_FILE_MAPPED), > > - global_node_page_state(NR_SHMEM), > > - global_page_state(NR_PAGETABLE), > > - global_page_state(NR_BOUNCE), > > - global_page_state(NR_FREE_PAGES), > > - free_pcp, > > - global_page_state(NR_FREE_CMA_PAGES)); > > + printk("active_anon:%lu inactive_anon:%lu isolated_anon:%lu\n", > > + global_node_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_ANON), > > + global_node_page_state(NR_INACTIVE_ANON), > > + global_node_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_ANON)); > > + printk("active_file:%lu inactive_file:%lu isolated_file:%lu\n", > > + global_node_page_state(NR_ACTIVE_FILE), > > + global_node_page_state(NR_INACTIVE_FILE), > > + global_node_page_state(NR_ISOLATED_FILE)); > > + printk("unevictable:%lu dirty:%lu writeback:%lu unstable:%lu\n", > > + global_node_page_state(NR_UNEVICTABLE), > > + global_node_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY), > > + global_node_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK), > > + global_node_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS)); > > + printk("slab_reclaimable:%lu slab_unreclaimable:%lu\n", > > + global_page_state(NR_SLAB_RECLAIMABLE), > > + global_page_state(NR_SLAB_UNRECLAIMABLE)); > > + printk("mapped:%lu shmem:%lu pagetables:%lu bounce:%lu\n", > > + global_node_page_state(NR_FILE_MAPPED), > > + global_node_page_state(NR_SHMEM), > > + global_page_state(NR_PAGETABLE), > > + global_page_state(NR_BOUNCE)); > > + printk("free:%lu free_pcp:%lu free_cma:%lu\n", > > + global_page_state(NR_FREE_PAGES), > > + free_pcp, > > + global_page_state(NR_FREE_CMA_PAGES)); > > a side note: > > this can make it harder to read, in _the worst case_. one printk() > guaranteed that we would see a single line in the serial log/etc. > the sort of a problem with multiple printks is that printks coming > from other CPUs will split that "previously single" line.
Not true. Note the multiple \n uses in the original code.
> just a notice. up to MM people to decide.
| |