On 5 Jan 2017, at 0:17, Matthew Macy wrote:
---- On Mon, 02 Jan 2017 06:01:50 -0800 Jonathan Anderson
<jonat...@freebsd.org> wrote ----
Hi all,
I'm seeing some unexpected PQ_LAUNDRY behaviour on something fairly
close
to -CURRENT (drm-next-4.7 with an IFC on 26 Dec). Aside from the use
of
not-quite-CURRENT, it's also very possible that I don't understand
how the
laundry queue is supposed to work. Nonetheless, I thought I'd check
whether
there is a tunable I should change, an issue with the laundry queue
itself,
etc.
After running X overnight (i915 can now run overnight on
drm-next-4.7!), I
end up with a little over half of my system memory in the laundry
queue and
a bunch of swap utilization. Even after closing X and shutting down
lots of
services, I see the following in top:
Please try the drm-next branch now. Up until very recently, the
shrinkers responsible for culling ttm/gem allocations were never run.
I've now implemented the shrinker, but it's driven from vm_lowmem, so
you'll probably still see what looks like a leak until you hit low
memory conditions. The shrinker should probably be run from
uma_timeout, but there isn't an eventhandler for that and I haven't
looked any further.
-M
Hi,
I am now testing the `drm-next` branch, but I'm finding it crashes much
more frequently (a la
https://github.com/FreeBSDDesktop/freebsd-base-graphics/issues/96) than
`drm-next-4.7`. While the 4.7 branch would sometimes only last a few
minutes, it would sometimes run for a day or more. On `drm-next`,
however, I think I'm yet to have 20 minutes of uptime. So, I haven't run
into the memory shrinker yet because I haven't had enough uptime to use
lots of memory. :) I will continue testing... any specific things I
ought to be doing?
Jon
--
jonat...@freebsd.org
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
