[PATCH 1/1] fixup: alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output

[PATCH 1/1] fixup: alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output

[Suren Baghdasaryan]

Document new "accurate:no" marker.

Fixes: 39d117e04d15 ("alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output")
Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
---
Based on mm-new

 Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst | 8 ++++++++
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
index 1776a06571c2..17668f82ff1c 100644
--- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
+++ b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
@@ -1014,6 +1014,14 @@ If file version is 2.0 or higher then each line may contain additional
 For example if the counters are not accurate, the line will be appended with
 "accurate:no" pair.
 
+Supported markers in v2:
+accurate:no
+              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not
+              accurate because of the failure to allocate storage required
+              to track some of the allocations made at this location.
+              Deltas in these counters are accurate, therefore counters
+              can be used to track allocation size and count changes.
+
 Example output.
 
 ::

base-commit: 199236646ffd82b5a5bcf2bca1579ea06cb0ae74
-- 
2.51.0.384.g4c02a37b29-goog

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fixup: alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output

[Usama Arif]

On 16/09/2025 17:01, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> Document new "accurate:no" marker.
> 
> Fixes: 39d117e04d15 ("alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output")
> Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> ---
> Based on mm-new
> 
>  Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst | 8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> index 1776a06571c2..17668f82ff1c 100644
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> @@ -1014,6 +1014,14 @@ If file version is 2.0 or higher then each line may contain additional
>  For example if the counters are not accurate, the line will be appended with
>  "accurate:no" pair.
>  
> +Supported markers in v2:
> +accurate:no
> +              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not

s/values/value/ maybe? :)> +              accurate because of the failure to allocate storage required

s/storage required/memory/

> +              to track some of the allocations made at this location.
> +              Deltas in these counters are accurate, therefore counters
> +              can be used to track allocation size and count changes.
> +

>  Example output.
>  
>  ::
> 
> base-commit: 199236646ffd82b5a5bcf2bca1579ea06cb0ae74

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fixup: alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output

[Suren Baghdasaryan]

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 8:50 PM Usama Arif <usamaarif642@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 16/09/2025 17:01, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > Document new "accurate:no" marker.
> >
> > Fixes: 39d117e04d15 ("alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output")
> > Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> > ---
> > Based on mm-new
> >
> >  Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst | 8 ++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> > index 1776a06571c2..17668f82ff1c 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> > @@ -1014,6 +1014,14 @@ If file version is 2.0 or higher then each line may contain additional
> >  For example if the counters are not accurate, the line will be appended with
> >  "accurate:no" pair.
> >
> > +Supported markers in v2:
> > +accurate:no
> > +              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not
>
> s/values/value/ maybe? :)> +              accurate because of the failure to allocate storage required

Maybe... English is not my first or second language, so I'm not really sure...

>
> s/storage required/memory/

I'm fine with the proposed changes. Andrew, if you agree with them,
could you please fold them in when you pick up this patch?

>
> > +              to track some of the allocations made at this location.
> > +              Deltas in these counters are accurate, therefore counters
> > +              can be used to track allocation size and count changes.
> > +
>
> >  Example output.
> >
> >  ::
> >
> > base-commit: 199236646ffd82b5a5bcf2bca1579ea06cb0ae74
>

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fixup: alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output

[Andrew Morton]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2025 21:50:51 +0100 Usama Arif <usamaarif642@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 16/09/2025 17:01, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > Document new "accurate:no" marker.
> > 
> > Fixes: 39d117e04d15 ("alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output")
> > Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> > ---
> > Based on mm-new
> > 
> >  Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst | 8 ++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> > index 1776a06571c2..17668f82ff1c 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> > @@ -1014,6 +1014,14 @@ If file version is 2.0 or higher then each line may contain additional
> >  For example if the counters are not accurate, the line will be appended with
> >  "accurate:no" pair.
> >  
> > +Supported markers in v2:
> > +accurate:no
> > +              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not
> 
> s/values/value/ maybe? :)

That's OK as-is.

> +              accurate because of the failure to allocate storage required
> 
> s/storage required/memory/

Sure.


From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: alloc_tag-mark-inaccurate-allocation-counters-in-proc-allocinfo-output-fix-fix
Date: Tue Sep 16 05:53:33 PM PDT 2025

simplification per Usama, reflow text

Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: David Wang <00107082@163.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
Cc: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Cc: Sourav Panda <souravpanda@google.com>
Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Cc: Usama Arif <usamaarif642@gmail.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---

 Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst |   10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst~alloc_tag-mark-inaccurate-allocation-counters-in-proc-allocinfo-output-fix-fix
+++ a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
@@ -1016,11 +1016,11 @@ For example if the counters are not accu
 
 Supported markers in v2:
 accurate:no
-              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not
-              accurate because of the failure to allocate storage required
-              to track some of the allocations made at this location.
-              Deltas in these counters are accurate, therefore counters
-              can be used to track allocation size and count changes.
+              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not accurate
+              because of the failure to allocate memory to track some of the
+              allocations made at this location.  Deltas in these counters are
+              accurate, therefore counters can be used to track allocation size
+              and count changes.
 
 Example output.
 
_

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fixup: alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output

[Suren Baghdasaryan]

On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 5:56 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2025 21:50:51 +0100 Usama Arif <usamaarif642@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 16/09/2025 17:01, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > Document new "accurate:no" marker.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 39d117e04d15 ("alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output")
> > > Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> > > ---
> > > Based on mm-new
> > >
> > >  Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst | 8 ++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> > > index 1776a06571c2..17668f82ff1c 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> > > +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> > > @@ -1014,6 +1014,14 @@ If file version is 2.0 or higher then each line may contain additional
> > >  For example if the counters are not accurate, the line will be appended with
> > >  "accurate:no" pair.
> > >
> > > +Supported markers in v2:
> > > +accurate:no
> > > +              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not
> >
> > s/values/value/ maybe? :)
>
> That's OK as-is.
>
> > +              accurate because of the failure to allocate storage required
> >
> > s/storage required/memory/
>
> Sure.
>
>
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Subject: alloc_tag-mark-inaccurate-allocation-counters-in-proc-allocinfo-output-fix-fix
> Date: Tue Sep 16 05:53:33 PM PDT 2025
>
> simplification per Usama, reflow text
>
> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Cc: David Wang <00107082@163.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
> Cc: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
> Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
> Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> Cc: Sourav Panda <souravpanda@google.com>
> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> Cc: Usama Arif <usamaarif642@gmail.com>
> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>

Perfect, Thanks!

> ---
>
>  Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst |   10 +++++-----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst~alloc_tag-mark-inaccurate-allocation-counters-in-proc-allocinfo-output-fix-fix
> +++ a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> @@ -1016,11 +1016,11 @@ For example if the counters are not accu
>
>  Supported markers in v2:
>  accurate:no
> -              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not
> -              accurate because of the failure to allocate storage required
> -              to track some of the allocations made at this location.
> -              Deltas in these counters are accurate, therefore counters
> -              can be used to track allocation size and count changes.
> +              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not accurate
> +              because of the failure to allocate memory to track some of the
> +              allocations made at this location.  Deltas in these counters are
> +              accurate, therefore counters can be used to track allocation size
> +              and count changes.
>
>  Example output.
>
> _
>

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fixup: alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output

[Randy Dunlap]

Andrew,

On 9/16/25 5:56 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2025 21:50:51 +0100 Usama Arif <usamaarif642@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On 16/09/2025 17:01, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>>> Document new "accurate:no" marker.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 39d117e04d15 ("alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output")
>>> Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
>>> ---
>>> Based on mm-new
>>>
>>>  Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst | 8 ++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
>>> index 1776a06571c2..17668f82ff1c 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
>>> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
>>> @@ -1014,6 +1014,14 @@ If file version is 2.0 or higher then each line may contain additional
>>>  For example if the counters are not accurate, the line will be appended with
>>>  "accurate:no" pair.
>>>  
>>> +Supported markers in v2:
>>> +accurate:no
>>> +              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not
>>
>> s/values/value/ maybe? :)
> 
> That's OK as-is.
> 
>> +              accurate because of the failure to allocate storage required
>>
>> s/storage required/memory/
> 
> Sure.
> 
> 
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Subject: alloc_tag-mark-inaccurate-allocation-counters-in-proc-allocinfo-output-fix-fix
> Date: Tue Sep 16 05:53:33 PM PDT 2025
> 
> simplification per Usama, reflow text
> 
> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Cc: David Wang <00107082@163.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
> Cc: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
> Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
> Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> Cc: Sourav Panda <souravpanda@google.com>
> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> Cc: Usama Arif <usamaarif642@gmail.com>
> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
> 
>  Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst |   10 +++++-----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst~alloc_tag-mark-inaccurate-allocation-counters-in-proc-allocinfo-output-fix-fix
> +++ a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst
> @@ -1016,11 +1016,11 @@ For example if the counters are not accu
>  
>  Supported markers in v2:
>  accurate:no

Please insert a blank line here to prevent a docs warning:

linux-next-20250918/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst:998: ERROR: Unexpected indentation. [docutils]

Thanks.

> -              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not
> -              accurate because of the failure to allocate storage required
> -              to track some of the allocations made at this location.
> -              Deltas in these counters are accurate, therefore counters
> -              can be used to track allocation size and count changes.
> +              Absolute values of the counters in this line are not accurate
> +              because of the failure to allocate memory to track some of the
> +              allocations made at this location.  Deltas in these counters are
> +              accurate, therefore counters can be used to track allocation size
> +              and count changes.
>  
>  Example output.
>  
> _

-- 
~Randy