On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 16:02:26 -0800 Brendan Higgins [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 1:00 AM [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

From: SeongJae Park <redacted>

This commit adds a shallow wrapper python script, ``/tools/damon/damo``
that provides more convenient interface.  Note that it is only aimed to
be used for minimal reference of the DAMON's raw interfaces and for
debugging of the DAMON itself.  Based on the debugfs interface, you can
create another cool and more convenient user space tools.

Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <redacted>
---
 MAINTAINERS               |   1 +
 tools/damon/.gitignore    |   1 +
 tools/damon/_dist.py      |  35 ++++
 tools/damon/bin2txt.py    |  64 +++++++
 tools/damon/damo          |  37 ++++
 tools/damon/heats.py      | 358 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 tools/damon/nr_regions.py |  88 ++++++++++
 tools/damon/record.py     | 194 +++++++++++++++++++++
 tools/damon/report.py     |  45 +++++
 tools/damon/wss.py        |  94 ++++++++++
 10 files changed, 917 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 tools/damon/.gitignore
 create mode 100644 tools/damon/_dist.py
 create mode 100644 tools/damon/bin2txt.py
 create mode 100755 tools/damon/damo
 create mode 100644 tools/damon/heats.py
 create mode 100644 tools/damon/nr_regions.py
 create mode 100644 tools/damon/record.py
 create mode 100644 tools/damon/report.py
 create mode 100644 tools/damon/wss.py

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index 5a4db07cad33..95729c138d34 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS

@@ -4616,6 +4616,7 @@ M:        SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.de>
 L:     linux-mm@kvack.org
 S:     Maintained
 F:     mm/damon.c
+F:     tools/damon/*

 DAVICOM FAST ETHERNET (DMFE) NETWORK DRIVER
 L:     netdev@vger.kernel.org

Another reason to put the MAINTAINERS update at the end; that way you
don't have multiple edits sprinkled around your patchset.

I made this change here due to the warning from 'checkpatch.pl' (WARNING:
added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?).  But, as it
is just a warning, I think simply ignore it and and make this change at the end
of the patchset would not be a problem, anyway.  What would you prefer?


Thanks,
SeongJae Park