On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 6:23 PM, JoonSoo Kim <js1304@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, Ezequiel. > > 2012/9/7 Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@xxxxxxxxx>: >> Hi Joonso, >> >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:09 PM, JoonSoo Kim <js1304@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> 2012/9/6 Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@xxxxxxxxx>: >>>> This patch cleans how we trace kmalloc and kmem_cache_alloc. >>>> In particular, it fixes out-of-memory tracing: now every failed >>>> allocation will trace reporting non-zero requested bytes, zero obtained bytes. >>> >>> Other SLAB allocators(slab, slub) doesn't consider zero obtained bytes >>> in tracing. >>> These just return "addr = 0, obtained size = cache size" >>> Why does the slob print a different output? >>> >> >> I plan to fix slab, slub in a future patchset. I think it would be nice to have >> a trace event reporting this event. But, perhaps it's not worth it. > > I think that output "addr = 0" is sufficient to trace out-of-memory situation. > Why do we need a output "addr = 0, obtained size = 0"? > You're absolutely right. Thanks, Ezequiel. -- 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/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>