From: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: page_ref tracepoints
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 10:42:41 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <t3pni56te2ii2wpgokp3pfk3do2g4lx72wwazfnamydhgxsu3h@2x3piqnoyqiy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z5KerEzWmu61hFDU@casper.infradead.org>
On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 07:55:24PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> The page reference count tracepoints currently look like this:
>
> __entry->pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
> __entry->flags = page->flags;
> __entry->count = page_ref_count(page);
> __entry->mapcount = atomic_read(&page->_mapcount);
> __entry->mapping = page->mapping;
> __entry->mt = get_pageblock_migratetype(page);
> TP_printk("pfn=0x%lx flags=%s count=%d mapcount=%d mapping=%p mt=%d val=%d",
>
>
> Soon, pages will not have a ->mapping, nor a ->mapcount [1]. But they will
> still have a refcount, at least for now. put_page() will move out of
> line and look something like this:
>
> void put_page(struct page *page)
> {
> unsigned long memdesc = page->memdesc;
> if (memdesc_is_folio(memdesc))
> return folio_put(memdesc_folio(memdesc));
> BUG_ON(memdesc_is_slab(memdesc));
> ... handle other memdesc types here ...
> if (memdesc_is_compound_head(memdesc))
> page = memdesc_head_page(memdesc);
>
> if (put_page_testzero(page))
> __put_page(page);
> }
>
> What I'm thinking is:
>
> - Define a set of folio_ref_* tracepoints which dump exactly the same info
> as page_ref does today
> - Remove mapping & mapcount from page_ref_* functions.
>
> Other ideas? I don't use these tracepoints myself; they generate far
> too much data to be useful to me.
I'm afraid I don't have any specific ideas but in the past I have used
these tracepoints mostly to debug issues around what is holding a pin on a
page and therefore preventing some operation, usually migration. For that
page_ref_count(page) and page->_mapcount were the most important fields, with
the latter required to determine the "expected" refcount.
The ->mapping field was less interesting to me when I have used these
tracepoints.
> [1] In case you missed it,
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/Z37pxbkHPbLYnDKn@casper.infradead.org/
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-27 23:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-23 19:55 Matthew Wilcox
2025-01-27 7:46 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-01-27 23:42 ` Alistair Popple [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=t3pni56te2ii2wpgokp3pfk3do2g4lx72wwazfnamydhgxsu3h@2x3piqnoyqiy \
--to=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox