From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, kent.overstreet@linux.dev, vbabka@suse.cz, hannes@cmpxchg.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, mgorman@suse.de, dave@stgolabs.net, willy@infradead.org, liam.howlett@oracle.com, corbet@lwn.net, void@manifault.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com, ldufour@linux.ibm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, peterx@redhat.com, david@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk, mcgrof@kernel.org, masahiroy@kernel.org, nathan@kernel.org, dennis@kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, muchun.song@linux.dev, rppt@kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, yosryahmed@google.com, yuzhao@google.com, dhowells@redhat.com, hughd@google.com, andreyknvl@gmail.com, keescook@chromium.org, ndesaulniers@google.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, ebiggers@google.com, ytcoode@gmail.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, bristot@redhat.com, vschneid@redhat.com, cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, 42.hyeyoo@gmail.com, glider@google.com, elver@google.com, dvyukov@google.com, shakeelb@google.com, songmuchun@bytedance.com, jbaron@akamai.com, rientjes@google.com, minchan@google.com, kaleshsingh@google.com, kernel-team@android.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, cgroups@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/40] Memory allocation profiling Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 11:07:22 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <ZFN1yswCd9wRgYPR@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAJuCfpHxbYFxDENYFfnggh1D8ot4s493PQX0C7kD-JLvixC-Vg@mail.gmail.com> On Wed 03-05-23 08:09:28, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 12:25 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote: [...] > Thanks for summarizing! > > > At least those I find the most important: > > - This is a big change and it adds a significant maintenance burden > > because each allocation entry point needs to be handled specifically. > > The cost will grow with the intended coverage especially there when > > allocation is hidden in a library code. > > Do you mean with more allocations in the codebase more codetags will > be generated? Is that the concern? No. I am mostly concerned about the _maintenance_ overhead. For the bare tracking (without profiling and thus stack traces) only those allocations that are directly inlined into the consumer are really of any use. That increases the code impact of the tracing because any relevant allocation location has to go through the micro surgery. e.g. is it really interesting to know that there is a likely memory leak in seq_file proper doing and allocation? No as it is the specific implementation using seq_file that is leaking most likely. There are other examples like that See? > Or maybe as you commented in > another patch that context capturing feature does not limit how many > stacks will be captured? That is a memory overhead which can be really huge and it would be nice to be more explicit about that in the cover letter. It is a downside for sure but not something that has a code maintenance impact and it is an opt-in so it can be enabled only when necessary. Quite honestly, though, the more I look into context capturing part it seems to me that there is much more to be reconsidered there and if you really want to move forward with the code tagging part then you should drop that for now. It would make the whole series smaller and easier to digest. > > - It has been brought up that this is duplicating functionality already > > available via existing tracing infrastructure. You should make it very > > clear why that is not suitable for the job > > I experimented with using tracing with _RET_IP_ to implement this > accounting. The major issue is the _RET_IP_ to codetag lookup runtime > overhead which is orders of magnitude higher than proposed code > tagging approach. With code tagging proposal, that link is resolved at > compile time. Since we want this mechanism deployed in production, we > want to keep the overhead to the absolute minimum. > You asked me before how much overhead would be tolerable and the > answer will always be "as small as possible". This is especially true > for slab allocators which are ridiculously fast and regressing them > would be very noticable (due to the frequent use). It would have been more convincing if you had some numbers at hands. E.g. this is a typical workload we are dealing with. With the compile time tags we are able to learn this with that much of cost. With a dynamic tracing we are able to learn this much with that cost. See? As small as possible is a rather vague term that different people will have a very different idea about. > There is another issue, which I think can be solved in a smart way but > will either affect performance or would require more memory. With the > tracing approach we don't know beforehand how many individual > allocation sites exist, so we have to allocate code tags (or similar > structures for counting) at runtime vs compile time. We can be smart > about it and allocate in batches or even preallocate more than we need > beforehand but, as I said, it will require some kind of compromise. I have tried our usual distribution config (only vmlinux without modules so the real impact will be larger as we build a lot of stuff into modules) just to get an idea: text data bss dec hex filename 28755345 17040322 19845124 65640791 3e99957 vmlinux.before 28867168 17571838 19386372 65825378 3ec6a62 vmlinux.after Less than 1% for text 3% for data. This is not all that terrible for an initial submission and a more dynamic approach could be added later. E.g. with a smaller pre-allocated hash table that could be expanded lazily. Anyway not something I would be losing sleep over. This can always be improved later on. > I understand that code tagging creates additional maintenance burdens > but I hope it also produces enough benefits that people will want > this. The cost is also hopefully amortized when additional > applications like the ones we presented in RFC [1] are built using the > same framework. TBH I am much more concerned about the maintenance burden on the MM side than the actual code tagging itslef which is much more self contained. I haven't seen other potential applications of the same infrastructure and maybe the code impact would be much smaller than in the MM proper. Our allocator API is really hairy and convoluted. > > - We already have page_owner infrastructure that provides allocation > > tracking data. Why it cannot be used/extended? > > 1. The overhead. Do you have any numbers? > 2. Covers only page allocators. Yes this sucks. > > I didn't think about extending the page_owner approach to slab > allocators but I suspect it would not be trivial. I don't see > attaching an owner to every slab object to be a scalable solution. The > overhead would again be of concern here. This would have been a nice argument to mention in the changelog so that we know that you have considered that option at least. Why should I (as a reviewer) wild guess that? > I should point out that there was one important technical concern > about lack of a kill switch for this feature, which was an issue for > distributions that can't disable the CONFIG flag. In this series we > addressed that concern. Thanks, that is certainly appreciated. I haven't looked deeper into that part but from the cover letter I have understood that CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING implies unconditional page_ext and therefore the memory overhead assosiated with that. There seems to be a killswitch nomem_profiling but from a quick look it doesn't seem to disable page_ext allocations. I might be missing something there of course. Having a highlevel describtion for that would be really nice as well. > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220830214919.53220-1-surenb@google.com/ -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, kent.overstreet@linux.dev, vbabka@suse.cz, hannes@cmpxchg.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, mgorman@suse.de, dave@stgolabs.net, willy@infradead.org, liam.howlett@oracle.com, corbet@lwn.net, void@manifault.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com, ldufour@linux.ibm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, peterx@redhat.com, david@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk, mcgrof@kernel.org, masahiroy@kernel.org, nathan@kernel.org, dennis@kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, muchun.song@linux.dev, rppt@kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, yosryahmed@google.com, yuzhao@google.com, dhowells@redhat.com, hughd@google.com, andreyknvl@gmail.com, keescook@chr Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/40] Memory allocation profiling Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 11:07:22 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <ZFN1yswCd9wRgYPR@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAJuCfpHxbYFxDENYFfnggh1D8ot4s493PQX0C7kD-JLvixC-Vg@mail.gmail.com> On Wed 03-05-23 08:09:28, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 12:25 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote: [...] > Thanks for summarizing! > > > At least those I find the most important: > > - This is a big change and it adds a significant maintenance burden > > because each allocation entry point needs to be handled specifically. > > The cost will grow with the intended coverage especially there when > > allocation is hidden in a library code. > > Do you mean with more allocations in the codebase more codetags will > be generated? Is that the concern? No. I am mostly concerned about the _maintenance_ overhead. For the bare tracking (without profiling and thus stack traces) only those allocations that are directly inlined into the consumer are really of any use. That increases the code impact of the tracing because any relevant allocation location has to go through the micro surgery. e.g. is it really interesting to know that there is a likely memory leak in seq_file proper doing and allocation? No as it is the specific implementation using seq_file that is leaking most likely. There are other examples like that See? > Or maybe as you commented in > another patch that context capturing feature does not limit how many > stacks will be captured? That is a memory overhead which can be really huge and it would be nice to be more explicit about that in the cover letter. It is a downside for sure but not something that has a code maintenance impact and it is an opt-in so it can be enabled only when necessary. Quite honestly, though, the more I look into context capturing part it seems to me that there is much more to be reconsidered there and if you really want to move forward with the code tagging part then you should drop that for now. It would make the whole series smaller and easier to digest. > > - It has been brought up that this is duplicating functionality already > > available via existing tracing infrastructure. You should make it very > > clear why that is not suitable for the job > > I experimented with using tracing with _RET_IP_ to implement this > accounting. The major issue is the _RET_IP_ to codetag lookup runtime > overhead which is orders of magnitude higher than proposed code > tagging approach. With code tagging proposal, that link is resolved at > compile time. Since we want this mechanism deployed in production, we > want to keep the overhead to the absolute minimum. > You asked me before how much overhead would be tolerable and the > answer will always be "as small as possible". This is especially true > for slab allocators which are ridiculously fast and regressing them > would be very noticable (due to the frequent use). It would have been more convincing if you had some numbers at hands. E.g. this is a typical workload we are dealing with. With the compile time tags we are able to learn this with that much of cost. With a dynamic tracing we are able to learn this much with that cost. See? As small as possible is a rather vague term that different people will have a very different idea about. > There is another issue, which I think can be solved in a smart way but > will either affect performance or would require more memory. With the > tracing approach we don't know beforehand how many individual > allocation sites exist, so we have to allocate code tags (or similar > structures for counting) at runtime vs compile time. We can be smart > about it and allocate in batches or even preallocate more than we need > beforehand but, as I said, it will require some kind of compromise. I have tried our usual distribution config (only vmlinux without modules so the real impact will be larger as we build a lot of stuff into modules) just to get an idea: text data bss dec hex filename 28755345 17040322 19845124 65640791 3e99957 vmlinux.before 28867168 17571838 19386372 65825378 3ec6a62 vmlinux.after Less than 1% for text 3% for data. This is not all that terrible for an initial submission and a more dynamic approach could be added later. E.g. with a smaller pre-allocated hash table that could be expanded lazily. Anyway not something I would be losing sleep over. This can always be improved later on. > I understand that code tagging creates additional maintenance burdens > but I hope it also produces enough benefits that people will want > this. The cost is also hopefully amortized when additional > applications like the ones we presented in RFC [1] are built using the > same framework. TBH I am much more concerned about the maintenance burden on the MM side than the actual code tagging itslef which is much more self contained. I haven't seen other potential applications of the same infrastructure and maybe the code impact would be much smaller than in the MM proper. Our allocator API is really hairy and convoluted. > > - We already have page_owner infrastructure that provides allocation > > tracking data. Why it cannot be used/extended? > > 1. The overhead. Do you have any numbers? > 2. Covers only page allocators. Yes this sucks. > > I didn't think about extending the page_owner approach to slab > allocators but I suspect it would not be trivial. I don't see > attaching an owner to every slab object to be a scalable solution. The > overhead would again be of concern here. This would have been a nice argument to mention in the changelog so that we know that you have considered that option at least. Why should I (as a reviewer) wild guess that? > I should point out that there was one important technical concern > about lack of a kill switch for this feature, which was an issue for > distributions that can't disable the CONFIG flag. In this series we > addressed that concern. Thanks, that is certainly appreciated. I haven't looked deeper into that part but from the cover letter I have understood that CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING implies unconditional page_ext and therefore the memory overhead assosiated with that. There seems to be a killswitch nomem_profiling but from a quick look it doesn't seem to disable page_ext allocations. I might be missing something there of course. Having a highlevel describtion for that would be really nice as well. > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220830214919.53220-1-surenb@google.com/ -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-04 9:07 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 320+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-05-01 16:54 [PATCH 00/40] Memory allocation profiling Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 01/40] lib/string_helpers: Drop space in string_get_size's output Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 18:13 ` Davidlohr Bueso 2023-05-01 18:13 ` Davidlohr Bueso 2023-05-01 19:35 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-01 19:35 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-01 19:57 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-01 19:57 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-01 21:16 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-01 21:16 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-01 21:33 ` Liam R. Howlett 2023-05-01 21:33 ` Liam R. Howlett 2023-05-02 0:11 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 0:11 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 0:53 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 0:53 ` Kent Overstreet [not found] ` <ZFAUj+Q+hP7cWs4w-jC9Py7bek1znysI04z7BkA@public.gmane.org> 2023-05-02 2:22 ` James Bottomley 2023-05-02 2:22 ` James Bottomley 2023-05-02 3:17 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 3:17 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 5:33 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-02 5:33 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-02 6:21 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 6:21 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 15:19 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-02 15:19 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-03 2:07 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 2:07 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 6:30 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-03 6:30 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-03 7:12 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 7:12 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 9:12 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-03 9:12 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-03 9:16 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 9:16 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 11:42 ` James Bottomley 2023-05-02 11:42 ` James Bottomley 2023-05-02 22:50 ` Dave Chinner 2023-05-02 22:50 ` Dave Chinner 2023-05-03 9:28 ` Vlastimil Babka 2023-05-03 9:28 ` Vlastimil Babka 2023-05-03 9:44 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-03 9:44 ` Andy Shevchenko 2023-05-03 12:15 ` James Bottomley 2023-05-03 12:15 ` James Bottomley 2023-05-02 7:55 ` Jani Nikula 2023-05-02 7:55 ` Jani Nikula 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 02/40] scripts/kallysms: Always include __start and __stop symbols Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 03/40] fs: Convert alloc_inode_sb() to a macro Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-02 12:35 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 12:35 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 19:57 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 19:57 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 20:20 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 20:20 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 04/40] nodemask: Split out include/linux/nodemask_types.h Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 05/40] prandom: Remove unused include Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 06/40] lib/string.c: strsep_no_empty() Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-02 12:37 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 12:37 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 07/40] Lazy percpu counters Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 19:17 ` Randy Dunlap 2023-05-01 19:17 ` Randy Dunlap 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 08/40] mm: introduce slabobj_ext to support slab object extensions Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 09/40] mm: introduce __GFP_NO_OBJ_EXT flag to selectively prevent slabobj_ext creation Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-02 12:50 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 12:50 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 18:33 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-02 18:33 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 10/40] mm/slab: introduce SLAB_NO_OBJ_EXT to avoid obj_ext creation Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 11/40] mm: prevent slabobj_ext allocations for slabobj_ext and kmem_cache objects Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 12/40] slab: objext: introduce objext_flags as extension to page_memcg_data_flags Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 13/40] lib: code tagging framework Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 14/40] lib: code tagging module support Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 15/40] lib: prevent module unloading if memory is not freed Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 16/40] lib: code tagging query helper functions Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 17/40] lib: add allocation tagging support for memory allocation profiling Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 18/40] lib: introduce support for page allocation tagging Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 19/40] change alloc_pages name in dma_map_ops to avoid name conflicts Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-02 15:50 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 15:50 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 18:38 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-02 18:38 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-02 20:09 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 20:09 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 20:18 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 20:18 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-02 20:24 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-02 20:24 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-02 20:39 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 20:39 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-02 20:41 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-02 20:41 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 16:25 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-03 16:25 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-03 18:03 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 18:03 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 20/40] mm: enable page allocation tagging Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 21/40] mm/page_ext: enable early_page_ext when CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING_DEBUG=y Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 22/40] mm: create new codetag references during page splitting Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 23/40] lib: add codetag reference into slabobj_ext Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 24/40] mm/slab: add allocation accounting into slab allocation and free paths Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 25/40] mm/slab: enable slab allocation tagging for kmalloc and friends Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 26/40] mm/slub: Mark slab_free_freelist_hook() __always_inline Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 27/40] mempool: Hook up to memory allocation profiling Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 28/40] timekeeping: Fix a circular include dependency Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-02 15:50 ` Thomas Gleixner 2023-05-02 15:50 ` Thomas Gleixner 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 29/40] mm: percpu: Introduce pcpuobj_ext Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 30/40] mm: percpu: Add codetag reference into pcpuobj_ext Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 31/40] mm: percpu: enable per-cpu allocation tagging Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 32/40] arm64: Fix circular header dependency Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 33/40] move stack capture functionality into a separate function for reuse Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 34/40] lib: code tagging context capture support Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 7:35 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-03 7:35 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-03 15:18 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 15:18 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 15:26 ` Dave Hansen 2023-05-03 15:26 ` Dave Hansen 2023-05-03 19:45 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 19:45 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-04 8:04 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-04 8:04 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-04 14:31 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-04 14:31 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 35/40] lib: implement context capture support for tagged allocations Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 7:39 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-03 7:39 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-03 15:24 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 15:24 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-04 8:09 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-04 8:09 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-04 16:22 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-04 16:22 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-05 8:40 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-05 8:40 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-05 18:10 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-05 18:10 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 36/40] lib: add memory allocations report in show_mem() Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 37/40] codetag: debug: skip objext checking when it's for objext itself Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 38/40] codetag: debug: mark codetags for reserved pages as empty Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 39/40] codetag: debug: introduce OBJEXTS_ALLOC_FAIL to mark failed slab_ext allocations Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` [PATCH 40/40] MAINTAINERS: Add entries for code tagging and memory allocation profiling Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 16:54 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 17:47 ` [PATCH 00/40] Memory " Roman Gushchin 2023-05-01 17:47 ` Roman Gushchin 2023-05-01 18:08 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 18:08 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-01 18:14 ` Roman Gushchin 2023-05-01 18:14 ` Roman Gushchin 2023-05-01 19:37 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-01 19:37 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-01 21:18 ` Roman Gushchin 2023-05-01 21:18 ` Roman Gushchin 2023-05-03 7:25 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-03 7:25 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-03 7:34 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 7:34 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 7:51 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-03 7:51 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-03 8:05 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 8:05 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 13:21 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-03 13:21 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-03 16:35 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 16:35 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 17:42 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 17:42 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 18:06 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 18:06 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 17:44 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 17:44 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 17:51 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 17:51 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 18:24 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 18:24 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 18:07 ` Johannes Weiner 2023-05-03 18:07 ` Johannes Weiner 2023-05-03 18:19 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 18:19 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 18:40 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 18:40 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 18:56 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 18:56 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 18:58 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 18:58 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 19:09 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 19:09 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 19:41 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 19:41 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 19:48 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 19:48 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 20:00 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 20:00 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 20:14 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 20:14 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-04 2:25 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-04 2:25 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-04 3:33 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-04 3:33 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-04 3:33 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-04 3:33 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-04 8:00 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-04 8:00 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-03 20:08 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 20:08 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 20:11 ` Johannes Weiner 2023-05-03 20:11 ` Johannes Weiner 2023-05-04 2:16 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-04 2:16 ` Tejun Heo 2023-05-03 20:04 ` Andrey Ryabinin 2023-05-03 20:04 ` Andrey Ryabinin 2023-05-03 9:50 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-03 9:50 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-03 9:54 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 9:54 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 10:24 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-03 10:24 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-03 9:57 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 9:57 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 10:26 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-03 10:26 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-03 15:30 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 15:30 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 12:33 ` James Bottomley 2023-05-03 12:33 ` James Bottomley 2023-05-03 14:31 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 14:31 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 15:28 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 15:28 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 15:37 ` Lorenzo Stoakes 2023-05-03 15:37 ` Lorenzo Stoakes 2023-05-03 16:03 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 16:03 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 15:49 ` James Bottomley 2023-05-03 15:49 ` James Bottomley 2023-05-03 15:09 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 15:09 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 16:28 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-03 16:28 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-03 17:40 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 17:40 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 18:03 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-03 18:03 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-03 18:07 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 18:07 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-03 18:12 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-03 18:12 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-04 9:07 ` Michal Hocko [this message] 2023-05-04 9:07 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-04 15:08 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-04 15:08 ` Suren Baghdasaryan 2023-05-07 10:27 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-07 10:27 ` Michal Hocko 2023-05-07 17:01 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-07 17:01 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-07 17:20 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-07 17:20 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-07 20:55 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-07 20:55 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-07 21:53 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-07 21:53 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-07 22:09 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-07 22:09 ` Steven Rostedt 2023-05-07 22:17 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-07 22:17 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-08 15:52 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-08 15:52 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-08 15:57 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-08 15:57 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-08 16:09 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-08 16:09 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-08 16:28 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-08 16:28 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-08 18:59 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-08 18:59 ` Petr Tesařík 2023-05-08 20:48 ` Kent Overstreet 2023-05-08 20:48 ` Kent Overstreet
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=ZFN1yswCd9wRgYPR@dhcp22.suse.cz \ --to=mhocko@suse.com \ --cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=andreyknvl@gmail.com \ --cc=arnd@arndb.de \ --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \ --cc=bristot@redhat.com \ --cc=bsegall@google.com \ --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=cl@linux.com \ --cc=corbet@lwn.net \ --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \ --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \ --cc=david@redhat.com \ --cc=dennis@kernel.org \ --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \ --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \ --cc=dvyukov@google.com \ --cc=ebiggers@google.com \ --cc=elver@google.com \ --cc=glider@google.com \ --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \ --cc=hughd@google.com \ --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \ --cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \ --cc=jbaron@akamai.com \ --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \ --cc=kaleshsingh@google.com \ --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \ --cc=keescook@chromium.org \ --cc=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \ --cc=kernel-team@android.com \ --cc=ldufour@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=liam.howlett@oracle.com \ --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=linux-modules@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \ --cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \ --cc=mgorman@suse.de \ --cc=minchan@google.com \ --cc=mingo@redhat.com \ --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \ --cc=nathan@kernel.org \ --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \ --cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \ --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \ --cc=penberg@kernel.org \ --cc=peterx@redhat.com \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ --cc=rientjes@google.com \ --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \ --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \ --cc=rppt@kernel.org \ --cc=shakeelb@google.com \ --cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \ --cc=surenb@google.com \ --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \ --cc=tj@kernel.org \ --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \ --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \ --cc=void@manifault.com \ --cc=vschneid@redhat.com \ --cc=will@kernel.org \ --cc=willy@infradead.org \ --cc=x86@kernel.org \ --cc=yosryahmed@google.com \ --cc=ytcoode@gmail.com \ --cc=yuzhao@google.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.