On Wed, 07 Dec 2011 11:52:02 -0500 KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 12/6/2011 7:54 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > >>From 28189e4622fd97324893a0b234183f64472a54d6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 09:58:16 +0900 > > Subject: [PATCH] oom: trace point for oom_score_adj > > > > oom_score_adj is set to prevent a task from being killed by OOM-Killer. > > Some daemons sets this value and their children inerit it sometimes. > > Because inheritance of oom_score_adj is done automatically, users > > can be confused at seeing the value and finds it's hard to debug. > > > > This patch adds trace point for oom_score_adj. This adds 3 trace > > points. at > > - update oom_score_adj > > > > - fork() > > - rename task->comm(typically, exec()) > > I don't think they have oom specific thing. Can you please add generic fork and > task rename tracepoint instead? > I think it makes oom-targeted debug difficult. This tracehook using task->signal->oom_score_adj as filter. This reduces traces much and makes debugging easier. If you need another trace point for other purpose, another trace point should be better. For generic purpose, oom_socre_adj filtering will not be necessary. > > > > Outputs will be following. > > bash-2404 [006] 199.620841: oom_score_adj_update: task 2404[bash] updates oom_score_ad j=-1000 > > "task 2404[bash]" don't look good to me. > > In almost case, we use either > > - [pid] comm > - pid:comm > - comm:pid > - comm-pid (ftrace specific) > > Why do we need to introduce alternative printing style? > No reason. ok, I'll fix. Thanks, -Kame -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>