On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:30:10AM -0800, Mike Kravetz wrote: > On 11/13/2017 10:17 AM, Dave Hansen wrote: > > On 11/13/2017 10:11 AM, Roman Gushchin wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 09:06:32AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > >>> On 11/13/2017 08:03 AM, Roman Gushchin wrote: > >>>> To solve this problem, let's display stats for all hugepage sizes. > >>>> To provide the backward compatibility let's save the existing format > >>>> for the default size, and add a prefix (e.g. 1G_) for non-default sizes. > >>> > >>> Is there something keeping you from using the sysfs version of this > >>> information? > >> > >> Just answered the same question to Michal. > >> > >> In two words: it would be nice to have a high-level overview of > >> memory usage in the system in /proc/meminfo. > > > > I don't think it's worth cluttering up meminfo for this, imnho. > > I tend to agree that it would be better not to add additional huge page > sizes here. It may not seem too intrusive to (potentially) add one extra > set of entries for GB huge pages on x86. However, other architectures > such as powerpc or sparc have several several huge pages sizes that could > potentially be added here as well. Although, in practice one does tend > to use a single huge pages size. If you change the default huge page > size, then those entries will be in /proc/meminfo. I do agree that it might add some unnecessary verbosity if these sizes are not used, but if they are, this information is super-useful. So, might be a conditional printing will work here? Or, at least, some total counter, e.g. how much memory is consumed by hugetlb pages? Thanks! -- 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>
