Thread (208 messages) 208 messages, 21 authors, 2024-02-29

Re: [PATCH v3 00/35] Memory allocation profiling

From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Date: 2024-02-14 16:02:30
Also in: cgroups, linux-arch, linux-doc, linux-fsdevel, linux-iommu, linux-mm, lkml

On Wed 14-02-24 10:01:14, Kent Overstreet wrote:
On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 03:46:33PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
quoted
On Wed 14-02-24 01:20:20, Johannes Weiner wrote:
[...]
quoted
I agree we should discuss how the annotations are implemented on a
technical basis, but my take is that we need something like this.
I do not think there is any disagreement on usefulness of a better
memory allocation tracking. At least for me the primary problem is the
implementation. At LFSMM last year we have heard that existing tracing
infrastructure hasn't really been explored much. Cover letter doesn't
really talk much about those alternatives so it is really hard to
evaluate whether the proposed solution is indeed our best way to
approach this.
Michal, we covered this before.
It is a good practice to summarize previous discussions in the cover
letter. Especially when there are different approaches discussed over a
longer time period or when the topic is controversial.

I do not see anything like that here. Neither for the existing tracing
infrastructure, page owner nor performance concerns discussed before
etc. Look, I do not want to nit pick or insist on formalisms but having
those data points layed out would make any further discussion much more
smooth.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help