On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 8:39 AM Kent Overstreet <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 05:31:11PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > On 2/12/24 22:39, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > Account slab allocations using codetag reference embedded into > > > slabobj_ext. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <[email protected]> > > > Co-developed-by: Kent Overstreet <[email protected]> > > > Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > mm/slab.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > mm/slub.c | 5 +++++ > > > 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/slab.h b/mm/slab.h > > > index 224a4b2305fb..c4bd0d5348cb 100644 > > > --- a/mm/slab.h > > > +++ b/mm/slab.h > > > @@ -629,6 +629,32 @@ prepare_slab_obj_exts_hook(struct kmem_cache *s, > > > gfp_t flags, void *p) > > > > > > #endif /* CONFIG_SLAB_OBJ_EXT */ > > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING > > > + > > > +static inline void alloc_tagging_slab_free_hook(struct kmem_cache *s, > > > struct slab *slab, > > > + void **p, int objects) > > > +{ > > > + struct slabobj_ext *obj_exts; > > > + int i; > > > + > > > + obj_exts = slab_obj_exts(slab); > > > + if (!obj_exts) > > > + return; > > > + > > > + for (i = 0; i < objects; i++) { > > > + unsigned int off = obj_to_index(s, slab, p[i]); > > > + > > > + alloc_tag_sub(&obj_exts[off].ref, s->size); > > > + } > > > +} > > > + > > > +#else > > > + > > > +static inline void alloc_tagging_slab_free_hook(struct kmem_cache *s, > > > struct slab *slab, > > > + void **p, int objects) {} > > > + > > > +#endif /* CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING */ > > > > You don't actually use the alloc_tagging_slab_free_hook() anywhere? I see > > it's in the next patch, but logically should belong to this one. > > I don't think it makes any sense to quibble about introducing something > in one patch that's not used until the next patch; often times, it's > just easier to review that way.
Yeah, there were several cases where I was debating with myself which way to split a patch (same was, as you noticed, with prepare_slab_obj_exts_hook()). Since we already moved prepare_slab_obj_exts_hook(), alloc_tagging_slab_free_hook() will probably move into the same patch. I'll go over the results once more to see if the new split makes more sense, if not will keep it here. Thanks!
