Re: [PATCH] mm: vmscan: add tracepoints for node reclaim

[Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 1:44 PM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In the page alloc fast path, it may do node reclaim, which may cause
> latency spike.
> We should add tracepoint for this event, and also mesure the latency
> it causes.

Minor typo : mesure ->measure.

>
> So bellow two tracepoints are introduced,
>         mm_vmscan_node_reclaim_begin
>         mm_vmscan_node_reclaim_end
>
> Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
> ---
>  include/trace/events/vmscan.h | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  mm/vmscan.c                   | 13 +++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/trace/events/vmscan.h b/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
> index a1cb913..9310d5b 100644
> --- a/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
> +++ b/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
> @@ -465,6 +465,54 @@
>                 __entry->ratio,
>                 show_reclaim_flags(__entry->reclaim_flags))
>  );
> +
> +TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_node_reclaim_begin,
> +
> +       TP_PROTO(int nid, int order, int may_writepage,
> +               gfp_t gfp_flags, int zid),
> +
> +       TP_ARGS(nid, order, may_writepage, gfp_flags, zid),
> +
> +       TP_STRUCT__entry(
> +               __field(int, nid)
> +               __field(int, order)
> +               __field(int, may_writepage)
> +               __field(gfp_t, gfp_flags)
> +               __field(int, zid)
> +       ),
> +
> +       TP_fast_assign(
> +               __entry->nid = nid;
> +               __entry->order = order;
> +               __entry->may_writepage = may_writepage;
> +               __entry->gfp_flags = gfp_flags;
> +               __entry->zid = zid;
> +       ),
> +
> +       TP_printk("nid=%d zid=%d order=%d may_writepage=%d gfp_flags=%s",
> +               __entry->nid,
> +               __entry->zid,
> +               __entry->order,
> +               __entry->may_writepage,
> +               show_gfp_flags(__entry->gfp_flags))
> +);
> +
> +TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_node_reclaim_end,
> +
> +       TP_PROTO(int result),
> +
> +       TP_ARGS(result),
> +
> +       TP_STRUCT__entry(
> +               __field(int, result)
> +       ),
> +
> +       TP_fast_assign(
> +               __entry->result = result;
> +       ),
> +
> +       TP_printk("result=%d", __entry->result)
> +);
>  #endif /* _TRACE_VMSCAN_H */
>
>  /* This part must be outside protection */
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index ac4806f..01a0401 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -4240,6 +4240,12 @@ static int __node_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned in
>                 .may_swap = 1,
>                 .reclaim_idx = gfp_zone(gfp_mask),
>         };
> +       int result;

If it goes to v2, then
s/result/ret ?

> +
> +       trace_mm_vmscan_node_reclaim_begin(pgdat->node_id, order,
> +                                       sc.may_writepage,
> +                                       sc.gfp_mask,
> +                                       sc.reclaim_idx);
>
>         cond_resched();
>         fs_reclaim_acquire(sc.gfp_mask);
> @@ -4267,7 +4273,12 @@ static int __node_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned in
>         current->flags &= ~PF_SWAPWRITE;
>         memalloc_noreclaim_restore(noreclaim_flag);
>         fs_reclaim_release(sc.gfp_mask);
> -       return sc.nr_reclaimed >= nr_pages;
> +
> +       result = sc.nr_reclaimed >= nr_pages;
> +
> +       trace_mm_vmscan_node_reclaim_end(result);
> +
> +       return result;
>  }
>
>  int node_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>