Re: [PATCH V3] x86/mm: Tracking linear mapping split events

2021-01-27 Thread Saravanan D
Hi Dave, > We don't use __x86_64__ in the kernel. This should be CONFIG_X86. Noted. I will correct this in V4 > or the level from the bottom where the split occurred: > > direct_map_level2_splits > direct_map_level3_splits > > That has the bonus of being usable on other

Re: [PATCH V3] x86/mm: Tracking linear mapping split events

2021-01-27 Thread Saravanan D
Hi Randy, > Documenation/ update, please. I will include it in the V4 patch. - Saravanan D

Re: [PATCH V3] x86/mm: Tracking linear mapping split events

2021-01-27 Thread Dave Hansen
On 1/27/21 2:50 PM, Saravanan D wrote: > +#if defined(__x86_64__) We don't use __x86_64__ in the kernel. This should be CONFIG_X86. > +#if defined(CONFIG_X86_64) || defined(CONFIG_X86_PAE) > + "direct_map_2M_splits", > +#else > + "direct_map_4M_splits", > +#endif > +

Re: [PATCH V3] x86/mm: Tracking linear mapping split events

2021-01-27 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 1/27/21 2:50 PM, Saravanan D wrote: > To help with debugging the sluggishness caused by TLB miss/reload, > we introduce monotonic lifetime hugepage split event counts since > system state: SYSTEM_RUNNING to be displayed as part of > /proc/vmstat in x86 servers > > The lifetime split event

[PATCH V3] x86/mm: Tracking linear mapping split events

2021-01-27 Thread Saravanan D
To help with debugging the sluggishness caused by TLB miss/reload, we introduce monotonic lifetime hugepage split event counts since system state: SYSTEM_RUNNING to be displayed as part of /proc/vmstat in x86 servers The lifetime split event information will be displayed at the bottom of