On Fri 21-08-15 09:30:33, Jörn Engel wrote: > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 08:53:21AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 20-08-15 23:34:51, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > [...] > > > > Reading a single file is, of course, easier but is it really worth the > > > > additional code? I haven't really looked at the patch so I might be > > > > missing something but what would be an advantage over reading > > > > /proc/<pid>/smaps and extracting the information from there? > > > > > > My first idea was just "users should feel it useful", but permission as David > > > commented sounds a good technical reason to me. > > > > 9 files changed, 112 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > is quite a lot especially when it touches hot paths like fork so it > > better should have a good usecase. I have already asked in the other > > email but is actually anybody requesting this? Nice to have is not > > a good justification IMO. > > I need some way to judge the real rss of a process, including huge > pages. No strong opinion on implementation details, but something is > clearly needed. The current implementation makes me worry. Is the per hstate break down really needed? The implementation would be much more easier without it. > If you have processes with 99% huge pages, you are currently reduced to > guesswork. If you have 99% of hugetlb pages then your load is rather specific and I would argue that /proc/<pid>/smaps (after patch 1) is a much better way to get what you want. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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>