Re: [PATCH] mm/cma: print total and used pages in cma_alloc()

[David Hildenbrand]

On 16.08.25 08:45, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 08:27:39 +0200 David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > @@ -858,8 +869,8 @@ static struct page *__cma_alloc(struct cma *cma, unsigned long count,
> > >    	if (!cma || !cma->count)
> > >    		return page;
> > >    
> > > -	pr_debug("%s(cma %p, name: %s, count %lu, align %d)\n", __func__,
> > > -		(void *)cma, cma->name, count, align);
> > > +	pr_debug("%s(cma %p, name: %s, total pages: %lu, used pages: %lu, request pages: %lu, align %d)\n",
> > > +		__func__, (void *)cma, cma->name, cma->count, cma_get_used_pages(cma), count, align);
> >
> > 		^ one space missing for proper indentation.
> >
> > But doing another spinlock cycle just for debugging purposes? That does
> > not feel right, sorry.
>
> If we're calling pr_debug() frequently enough for this to matter, we
> have other problems!

We call it for each and every actual CMA allocation? I really don't see 
why we want to just randomly make CMA allocation latency worse.

Is the existing pr_debug() a problem? Maybe. But who actually has debug 
messages enabled in any sane setup?

--
Cheers

David / dhildenb