Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:30:07 +0530 | From | Balbir Singh <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/7] memcg reclaim tracepoint |
| |
* KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> [2010-07-16 19:12:46]:
> Recently, Mel Gorman added some vmscan tracepoint. but they can't > trace memcg. So, This patch series does. > > > following three patches are nit fix and cleanups. > > memcg: sc.nr_to_reclaim should be initialized > memcg: mem_cgroup_shrink_node_zone() doesn't need sc.nodemask > memcg: nid and zid can be calculated from zone > > following four patches are tracepoint conversion and adding memcg tracepoints. > > vmscan: convert direct reclaim tracepoint to DEFINE_EVENT > memcg, vmscan: add memcg reclaim tracepoint > vmscan: convert mm_vmscan_lru_isolate to DEFINE_EVENT > memcg, vmscan: add mm_vmscan_memcg_isolate tracepoint > > > diffstat > ================ > include/linux/memcontrol.h | 6 ++-- > include/linux/mmzone.h | 5 +++ > include/linux/swap.h | 3 +- > include/trace/events/vmscan.h | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > mm/memcontrol.c | 15 +++++--- > mm/vmscan.c | 35 ++++++++++++------ > 6 files changed, 118 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > > Sameple output is here. > ========================= > > dd-1851 [001] 158.837763: mm_vmscan_memcg_reclaim_begin: order=0 may_writepage=1 gfp_flags=GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE > dd-1851 [001] 158.837783: mm_vmscan_memcg_isolate: isolate_mode=0 order=0 nr_requested=32 nr_scanned=32 nr_taken=32 contig_taken=0 contig_dirty=0 contig_failed=0 > dd-1851 [001] 158.837860: mm_vmscan_memcg_reclaim_end: nr_reclaimed=32 > (...) > dd-1970 [000] 266.608235: mm_vmscan_wakeup_kswapd: nid=0 zid=1 order=0 > dd-1970 [000] 266.608239: mm_vmscan_wakeup_kswapd: nid=1 zid=1 order=0 > dd-1970 [000] 266.608248: mm_vmscan_wakeup_kswapd: nid=2 zid=1 order=0 > kswapd1-348 [001] 266.608254: mm_vmscan_kswapd_wake: nid=1 order=0 > dd-1970 [000] 266.608254: mm_vmscan_wakeup_kswapd: nid=3 zid=1 order=0 > kswapd3-350 [000] 266.608266: mm_vmscan_kswapd_wake: nid=3 order=0 > (...) > kswapd0-347 [001] 267.328891: mm_vmscan_memcg_softlimit_reclaim_begin: order=0 may_writepage=1 gfp_flags=GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE > kswapd0-347 [001] 267.328897: mm_vmscan_memcg_isolate: isolate_mode=0 order=0 nr_requested=32 nr_scanned=32 nr_taken=32 contig_taken=0 contig_dirty=0 contig_failed=0 > kswapd0-347 [001] 267.328915: mm_vmscan_memcg_isolate: isolate_mode=0 order=0 nr_requested=32 nr_scanned=32 nr_taken=32 contig_taken=0 contig_dirty=0 contig_failed=0 > kswapd0-347 [001] 267.328989: mm_vmscan_memcg_softlimit_reclaim_end: nr_reclaimed=32 > kswapd0-347 [001] 267.329019: mm_vmscan_lru_isolate: isolate_mode=1 order=0 nr_requested=32 nr_scanned=32 nr_taken=32 contig_taken=0 contig_dirty=0 contig_failed=0 > kswapd0-347 [001] 267.330562: mm_vmscan_lru_isolate: isolate_mode=1 order=0 nr_requested=32 nr_scanned=32 nr_taken=32 contig_taken=0 contig_dirty=0 contig_failed=0 > (...) > kswapd2-349 [001] 267.407081: mm_vmscan_kswapd_sleep: nid=2 > kswapd3-350 [001] 267.408077: mm_vmscan_kswapd_sleep: nid=3 > kswapd1-348 [000] 267.427858: mm_vmscan_kswapd_sleep: nid=1 > kswapd0-347 [001] 267.430064: mm_vmscan_kswapd_sleep: nid=0 >
This looks interesting, but I think I need to look deeper to see how the name like mm_vmscan_memcg_softlimit_reclaim_begin is generated.
-- Three Cheers, Balbir
| |