On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 8:52 PM Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 08:32:24PM GMT, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 5:53 PM Kent Overstreet > > <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > We already do this when reporting slab info - more consistent and more > > > readable. > > > > Hi Kent, > > I remember we discussed this before and agreed upon Pasha's suggestion > > that if needed one could do: > > > > # sort -g /proc/allocinfo|tail|numfmt --to=iec > > 2.8M 22648 fs/kernfs/dir.c:615 func:__kernfs_new_node > > 3.8M 953 mm/memory.c:4214 func:alloc_anon_folio > > 4.0M 1010 drivers/staging/ctagmod/ctagmod.c:20 [ctagmod] > > func:ctagmod_start > > 4.1M 4 net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c:2567 > > func:nf_ct_alloc_hashtable > > 6.0M 1532 mm/filemap.c:1919 func:__filemap_get_folio > > 8.8M 2785 kernel/fork.c:307 func:alloc_thread_stack_node > > 13M 234 block/blk-mq.c:3421 func:blk_mq_alloc_rqs > > 14M 3520 mm/mm_init.c:2530 func:alloc_large_system_hash > > 15M 3656 mm/readahead.c:247 func:page_cache_ra_unbounded > > 55M 4887 mm/slub.c:2259 func:alloc_slab_page > > 122M 31168 mm/page_ext.c:270 func:alloc_page_ext > > > > That's even documented here: > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10.8/source/Documentation/mm/allocation-profiling.rst#L36 > > Did something change? > > That's for /proc/allocinfo, which this patch doesn't change - this is > the oom report. Ah, got it! Looks reasonable to me. Reviewed-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@xxxxxxxxxx>
