On 28.03.24 10:51, Barry Song wrote:
From: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@xxxxxxxx>
Profiling a system blindly with mTHP has become challenging due
to the lack of visibility into its operations. Presenting the
success rate of mTHP allocations appears to be pressing need.
Recently, I've been experiencing significant difficulty debugging
performance improvements and regressions without these figures.
It's crucial for us to understand the true effectiveness of
mTHP in real-world scenarios, especially in systems with
fragmented memory.
This patch sets up the framework for per-order mTHP counters,
starting with the introduction of alloc_success and alloc_fail
counters. Incorporating additional counters should now be
straightforward as well.
The initial two unsigned longs for each event are unused, given
that order-0 and order-1 are not mTHP. Nonetheless, this refinement
improves code clarity.
Signed-off-by: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@xxxxxxxx>
---
-v2:
* move to sysfs and provide per-order counters; David, Ryan, Willy
-v1:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240326030103.50678-1-21cnbao@xxxxxxxxx/
include/linux/huge_mm.h | 17 +++++++++++++
mm/huge_memory.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
mm/memory.c | 3 +++
3 files changed, 74 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/linux/huge_mm.h b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
index e896ca4760f6..27fa26a22a8f 100644
--- a/include/linux/huge_mm.h
+++ b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
@@ -264,6 +264,23 @@ unsigned long thp_vma_allowable_orders(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
enforce_sysfs, orders);
}
+enum thp_event_item {
+ THP_ALLOC_SUCCESS,
+ THP_ALLOC_FAIL,
+ NR_THP_EVENT_ITEMS
+};
I'm wondering if these should be ANON specific for now. We might want to
add others (shmem, file) in the future.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
