On 1/19/23 11:04 AM, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-01-19 at 10:59 -0500, Matthew Rosato wrote:
>> On 1/19/23 6:03 AM, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> static char *pci_sw_names[] = {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "Allocated pages",
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +/* TODO "Allocated pages", */
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ? Forgot to finish this?
>>>
>>> Definitely forgot to remove the TODO. I think my latest plan was to
>>> just remove this counter. With the DMA API conversion the
>>> dma_map_ops.alloc and dma_map_ops.free move to common code and I don't
>>> see how we could differentiate these from map/unmap on our side. I'm
>>> not sure how helpful this counter really is either. If you're
>>> interested in how many pages are mapped long term I think it makes more
>>> sense to look at the difference between mapped and unmapped pages. What
>>> do you think?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>
>> Sounds reasonable to me, but I also note that without this series, when viewing statistics for a device, mapped - unmapped != allocated. Maybe allocated pages was already broken, or is it taking into account something else that mapped - unmapped would not (maybe mapping the same page multiple times)?
>>
>>
>
> Allocated Pages only counts the memory allocated via dma_map_ops.alloc
> so it would not count long term mappings of memory the driver allocated
> differently and then mapped for long term use.
Oh, right, I see it now.
Seems to me then that mapped-unmapped is more indicative of the actual footprint anyway so in the absence of an obvious analogue I'm fine with just getting rid of it.
