On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 06:16:50PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 16:42:29 -0400 > Kent Overstreet <kent.overstr...@linux.dev> wrote: > > > > Haven't tried that yet but will do. Thanks for the reference code! > > > > Is it really worth the effort of benchmarking tracing API overhead here? > > > > The main cost of a tracing based approach is going to to be the data > > structure > > for remembering outstanding allocations so that free events can be matched > > to > > the appropriate callsite. Regardless of whether it's done with BFP or by > > attaching to the tracepoints directly, that's going to be the main overhead. > > The point I was making here is that you do not need your own hooking > mechanism. You can get the information directly by attaching to the > tracepoint. > > > > static void my_callback(void *data, unsigned long call_site, > > > const void *ptr, struct kmem_cache *s, > > > size_t bytes_req, size_t bytes_alloc, > > > gfp_t gfp_flags) > > > { > > > struct my_data_struct *my_data = data; > > > > > > { do whatever } > > > } > > The "do whatever" is anything you want to do. > > Or is the data structure you create with this approach going to be too much > overhead? How hard is it for a hash or binary search lookup?
If you don't think it's hard, go ahead and show us.