From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx169.postini.com [74.125.245.169]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3289A6B003B for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 11:42:55 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 17:42:49 +0200 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [-] drop_caches-add-some-documentation-and-info-messsge.patch removed from -mm tree Message-ID: <20130711154249.GL21667@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <51ddc31f.zotz9WDKK3lWXtDE%akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20130711073644.GB21667@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20130711123903.GF21667@dhcp22.suse.cz> <51DED095.7050803@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51DED095.7050803@intel.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dave Hansen Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-mm@kvack.org On Thu 11-07-13 08:34:45, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 07/11/2013 05:39 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > >> I would turn this into a trace point but that would be much weaker > >> because the one who is debugging an issue would have to think about > >> enabling it before the affected workload starts. Which is not possible > >> quite often. Having logs and looking at them afterwards is so > >> _convinient_. > > It would also be a lot weaker than the printk, but we could always add a > counter for this stuff and at least dump it out in /proc/vmstat. We > wouldn't know who was doing it, but we'd at least know someone _was_ > doing it. It would also have a decent chance of getting picked up by > existing log collection systems. But wouldn't be a counter more intrusive code wise? Dunno, but printk serves it purpose and it doesn't add much to the code. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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