On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 02:35:29PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 2:29 PM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 05:01:19PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 2:40 PM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 01:38:59PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > > > Introduce CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING which provides definitions to easily > > > > > instrument memory allocators. It registers an "alloc_tags" codetag type > > > > > with /proc/allocinfo interface to output allocation tag information when > > > > > > > > Please don't add anything new to the top-level /proc directory. This > > > > should likely live in /sys. > > > > > > Ack. I'll find a more appropriate place for it then. > > > It just seemed like such generic information which would belong next > > > to meminfo/zoneinfo and such... > > > > Save yourself a cycle of "rework the whole fs interface only to have > > someone else tell you no" and put it in debugfs, not sysfs. Wrangling > > with debugfs is easier than all the macro-happy sysfs stuff; you don't > > have to integrate with the "device" model; and there is no 'one value > > per file' rule. > > Thanks for the input. This file used to be in debugfs but reviewers > felt it belonged in /proc if it's to be used in production > environments. Some distros (like Android) disable debugfs in > production. FWIW, I agree debugfs is not right. If others feel it's right in /proc, I certainly won't NAK -- it's just been that we've traditionally been trying to avoid continuing to pollute the top-level /proc and instead associate new things with something in /sys. -- Kees Cook
