On Thu, 08 Dec 2011 12:33:35 -0500 KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 12/7/2011 8:47 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > 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. > > see Documentation/trace/event.txt 5. Event filgtering > > Now, both ftrace and perf have good filter feature. Isn't this enough? > Could you make patch ? Then, I stop this and go other probelm. 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>