On Wed 20-07-16 20:11:09, Janani Ravichandran wrote: > > > On Jul 11, 2016, at 8:03 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon 11-07-16 10:12:51, Rik van Riel wrote: > >> > >> What mechanism do you have in mind for obtaining the name, > >> Michal? > > > > Not sure whether tracing infrastructure allows printk like %ps. If not > > then it doesn't sound too hard to add. > > It does allow %ps. Currently what is being printed is the function symbol > of the callback using %pF. I’d like to know why %pF is used instead of > %ps in this case. >From a quick look into the code %pF should be doing the same thing as %ps in the end. Some architectures just need some magic to get a proper address of the function. > Michal, just to make sure I understand you correctly, do you mean that we > could infer the names of the shrinkers by looking at the names of their callbacks? Yes, %ps can then be used for the name of the shrinker structure (assuming it is available). -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>