From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEB033C38 for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 00:56:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758070601; cv=none; b=l9FPBnBWb4g67d/JUht8BMM4MpRb90TDQKHMwUwCyGAN3t0MWWfnkL3bgelqmbigr0zEIj7ypPBbUr9NzXcIAOlmKPxbJPuWOYyGK9UPNFP6qb6k3WzcbSDgqTmceCQIc6By1HvLLJowCqd2hjNPjOrhWDY5XF5m1mEnX9dytV8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758070601; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kN+NGCVBMUoWfbiflAXY+vstv5YMeUL20qWoyAdAJDQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=L7x69g5bG14wa+xBbfnLp3yrKJwOu5ryAzzydqWixtSCZN41cxI0sNwBC+2w3CSzc0o2PHcUISy2wRs3YlVWdUeww9Hng8DQTjzkxnezeMYYTcxfdm0N9jZaMSMDqn87bpWNVbXBBh0PtT2RuaMPaiJMxDkCST1dxijfQ80+O50= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b=OVmESGHI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b="OVmESGHI" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 19DAEC4CEEB; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 00:56:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org; s=korg; t=1758070600; bh=kN+NGCVBMUoWfbiflAXY+vstv5YMeUL20qWoyAdAJDQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=OVmESGHIIFGkkDubiKZqf7FYfPatb/hvLIU9LdRirkf41miv4FzHSnGOra9NqM0+L Gxbh8ztusglpGX8N3oGu87lUBFyWDFQVOBaW14lhJZki8VnxG+f0HpJRC2uFEHu3SV hmNEq84s6lErCVuE0Ih2XI963DoP3n0vuIJUzzfU= Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 17:56:39 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Usama Arif Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan , kent.overstreet@linux.dev, vbabka@suse.cz, hannes@cmpxchg.org, rientjes@google.com, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, harry.yoo@oracle.com, shakeel.butt@linux.dev, 00107082@163.com, pyyjason@gmail.com, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, souravpanda@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] fixup: alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output Message-Id: <20250916175639.2368772636d5e543faa5b13b@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <4c4e97c1-7f93-4c09-a235-ab169a998ef0@gmail.com> References: <20250916160110.266190-1-surenb@google.com> <4c4e97c1-7f93-4c09-a235-ab169a998ef0@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.8.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 16 Sep 2025 21:50:51 +0100 Usama Arif wrote: > > > On 16/09/2025 17:01, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > Document new "accurate:no" marker. > > > > Fixes: 39d117e04d15 ("alloc_tag: mark inaccurate allocation counters in /proc/allocinfo output") > > Suggested-by: Andrew Morton > > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan > > --- > > Based on mm-new > > > > Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst | 8 ++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst > > index 1776a06571c2..17668f82ff1c 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst > > +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst > > @@ -1014,6 +1014,14 @@ If file version is 2.0 or higher then each line may contain additional > > For example if the counters are not accurate, the line will be appended with > > "accurate:no" pair. > > > > +Supported markers in v2: > > +accurate:no > > + Absolute values of the counters in this line are not > > s/values/value/ maybe? :) That's OK as-is. > + accurate because of the failure to allocate storage required > > s/storage required/memory/ Sure. From: Andrew Morton Subject: alloc_tag-mark-inaccurate-allocation-counters-in-proc-allocinfo-output-fix-fix Date: Tue Sep 16 05:53:33 PM PDT 2025 simplification per Usama, reflow text Cc: David Rientjes Cc: David Wang <00107082@163.com> Cc: Johannes Weiner Cc: Kent Overstreet Cc: Pasha Tatashin Cc: Roman Gushchin Cc: Shakeel Butt Cc: Sourav Panda Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan Cc: Usama Arif Cc: Vlastimil Babka Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton --- Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) --- a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst~alloc_tag-mark-inaccurate-allocation-counters-in-proc-allocinfo-output-fix-fix +++ a/Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst @@ -1016,11 +1016,11 @@ For example if the counters are not accu Supported markers in v2: accurate:no - Absolute values of the counters in this line are not - accurate because of the failure to allocate storage required - to track some of the allocations made at this location. - Deltas in these counters are accurate, therefore counters - can be used to track allocation size and count changes. + Absolute values of the counters in this line are not accurate + because of the failure to allocate memory to track some of the + allocations made at this location. Deltas in these counters are + accurate, therefore counters can be used to track allocation size + and count changes. Example output. _