On 2/4/24 14:09, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 05:44:42PM +0800, Fangzheng Zhang wrote: >> In order to enhance slab debugging, we add slabreclaim flag to >> slabinfo. Slab type is also an important analysis point in slabinfo >> for per slab, when various problems such as memory leaks or memory >> statistics occur. >> >> Signed-off-by: Fangzheng Zhang <fangzheng.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> mm/slab_common.c | 7 ++++--- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c >> index 238293b1dbe1..aeeb2bfe6dda 100644 >> --- a/mm/slab_common.c >> +++ b/mm/slab_common.c >> @@ -1038,7 +1038,7 @@ static void print_slabinfo_header(struct seq_file *m) >> seq_puts(m, "slabinfo - version: 2.1\n"); >> seq_puts(m, "# name <active_objs> <num_objs> <objsize> <objperslab> <pagesperslab>"); >> seq_puts(m, " : tunables <limit> <batchcount> <sharedfactor>"); >> - seq_puts(m, " : slabdata <active_slabs> <num_slabs> <sharedavail>"); >> + seq_puts(m, " : slabdata <active_slabs> <num_slabs> <sharedavail> <slabreclaim>"); > > Doesn't this change the slabinfo version number above? Where is this > change documented so that userspace knows about it? Yeah I was vary about this. Do the other longer-time-than-me slab maintainers recall how we handled this in the past? Also the information is already available, even if harder to gather, in the file /sys/kernel/slab/$cache/reclaim_account > thanks, > > greg k-h
