(2012/11/15 22:47), Glauber Costa wrote: > On 11/15/2012 01:41 PM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote: >> (2012/11/15 11:54), Glauber Costa wrote: >>> The idea is to synchronously do it, leaving it up to the shrinking >>> facilities in vmscan.c and/or others. Not actively retrying shrinking >>> may leave the caches alive for more time, but it will remove the ugly >>> wakeups. One would argue that if the caches have free objects but are >>> not being shrunk, it is because we don't need that memory yet. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glom...@parallels.com> >>> CC: Michal Hocko <mho...@suse.cz> >>> CC: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com> >>> CC: Johannes Weiner <han...@cmpxchg.org> >>> CC: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> >> >> I agree this patch but can we have a way to see the number of unaccounted >> zombie cache usage for debugging ? >> >> Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com> >> > Any particular interface in mind ? >
Hmm, it's debug interface and having cgroup file may be bad..... If it can be seen in bytes or some, /proc/vmstat ? out_of_track_slabs xxxxxxx. hm ? Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
