On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 11:03:34AM +0300, Dmitry Rokosov wrote: [...] > > > + cgroup_name(memcg->css.cgroup, > > > + __entry->name, > > > + sizeof(__entry->name)); > > > > Any reason not to use cgroup_ino? cgroup_name may conflict and be > > ambiguous. > > I actually didn't consider it, as the cgroup name serves as a clear tag > for filtering the appropriate cgroup in the entire trace file. However, > you are correct that there might be conflicts with cgroup names. > Therefore, it might be better to display both tags: ino and name. What > do you think on this? > I can see putting cgroup name can avoid pre or post processing, so putting both are fine. Though keep in mind that cgroup_name acquires a lock which may impact the applications running on the system.
