lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Sep]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 00/30] Code tagging framework and applications
On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 09:00:17AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 11:19:48AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
>
> > It's also unclear *who* would enable this. It looks like it would mostly
> > have value during the development stage of an embedded platform to track
> > kernel memory usage on a per-application basis in an environment where it
> > may be difficult to setup tracing and tracking. Would it ever be enabled
> > in production?
>
> Afaict this is developer only; it is all unconditional code.
>
> > Would a distribution ever enable this?
>
> I would sincerely hope not. Because:
>
> > If it's enabled, any overhead cannot be disabled/enabled at run or
> > boot time so anyone enabling this would carry the cost without never
> > necessarily consuming the data.
>
> this.

We could make it a boot parameter, with the alternatives infrastructure - with a
bit of refactoring there'd be a single function call to nop out, and then we
could also drop the elf sections as well, so that when built in but disabled the
overhead would be practically nil.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-09-01 16:31    [W:0.234 / U:0.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site