From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail191.messagelabs.com (mail191.messagelabs.com [216.82.242.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53DAA6B0078 for ; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:38:29 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:38:19 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [RFC mm][PATCH 2/5] percpu cached mm counter Message-ID: <20091210173819.GA5256@elte.hu> References: <20091210163115.463d96a3.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091210163448.338a0bd2.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091210075454.GB25549@elte.hu> <20091210172040.37d259d3.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091210083310.GB6834@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Christoph Lameter Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Peter Zijlstra , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , minchan.kim@gmail.com List-ID: * Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > No, i'm not suggesting that - i'm just suggesting that right now MM > > stats are not very well suited to be exposed via perf. If we wanted to > > measure/sample the information in /proc//statm it just wouldnt be > > possible. We have a few events like pagefaults and a few tracepoints as > > well - but more would be possible IMO. > > vital MM stats are exposed via /proc/ interfaces. Performance > monitoring is something optional MM VM stats are used for VM decision > on memory and process handling. You list a few facts here but what is your point? Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org