Hi Aneesh,
On 03/03/15 12:13, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>
> Are we interested only in successful allocation and release ? Should we also
> have the trace point carry information regarding failure ?
>
> -aneesh
>
I think we actually can be interested in tracing allocation failures
too. Thanks for the remark.
Should it be smth like that?
@@ -408,6 +410,8 @@ struct page *cma_alloc(struct cma *cma, int count,
unsigned int align)
start = bitmap_no + mask + 1;
}
+ trace_cma_alloc(cma, page, count);
+
pr_debug("%s(): returned %p\n", __func__, page);
return page;
}
and in include/trace/events/cma.h:
+TRACE_EVENT(cma_alloc,
<...>
+ TP_fast_assign(
+ __entry->page = page;
+ __entry->count = count;
+ ),
+
+ TP_printk("page=%p pfn=%lu count=%lu\n",
+ __entry->page,
+ __entry->page ? page_to_pfn(__entry->page) : 0,
+ __entry->count)
--
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>