Parag Warudkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am running -rc3 on my AMD64 laptop and I noticed it becomes sluggish after
> use mainly due to growing swap use. It has 768M of RAM and a Gig of swap.
> After following this thread, I started monitoring /proc/slabinfo. It seems
> size-64 is continuously growing and doing a compile run seem to make it grow
> noticeably faster. After a day's uptime size-64 line in /proc/slabinfo looks
> like
>
> size-64 7216543 7216544 64 61 1 : tunables 120 60 0
> :
> slabdata 118304 118304 0
Plenty of moisture there.
Could you please use this patch? Make sure that you enable
CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER (might not be needed for __builtin_return_address(0),
but let's be sure). Also enable CONFIG_DEBUG_SLAB.
From: Manfred Spraul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
With the patch applied,
echo "size-4096 0 0 0" > /proc/slabinfo
walks the objects in the size-4096 slab, printing out the calling address
of whoever allocated that object.
It is for leak detection.
diff -puN mm/slab.c~slab-leak-detector mm/slab.c
--- 25/mm/slab.c~slab-leak-detector 2005-02-15 21:06:44.000000000 -0800
+++ 25-akpm/mm/slab.c 2005-02-15 21:06:44.000000000 -0800
@@ -2116,6 +2116,15 @@ cache_alloc_debugcheck_after(kmem_cache_
*dbg_redzone1(cachep, objp) = RED_ACTIVE;
*dbg_redzone2(cachep, objp) = RED_ACTIVE;
}
+ {
+ int objnr;
+ struct slab *slabp;
+
+ slabp = GET_PAGE_SLAB(virt_to_page(objp));
+
+ objnr = (objp - slabp->s_mem) / cachep->objsize;
+ slab_bufctl(slabp)[objnr] = (unsigned long)caller;
+ }
objp += obj_dbghead(cachep);
if (cachep->ctor && cachep->flags & SLAB_POISON) {
unsigned long ctor_flags = SLAB_CTOR_CONSTRUCTOR;
@@ -2179,12 +2188,14 @@ static void free_block(kmem_cache_t *cac
objnr = (objp - slabp->s_mem) / cachep->objsize;
check_slabp(cachep, slabp);
#if DEBUG
+#if 0
if (slab_bufctl(slabp)[objnr] != BUFCTL_FREE) {
printk(KERN_ERR "slab: double free detected in cache
'%s', objp %p.\n",
cachep->name, objp);
BUG();
}
#endif
+#endif
slab_bufctl(slabp)[objnr] = slabp->free;
slabp->free = objnr;
STATS_DEC_ACTIVE(cachep);
@@ -2998,6 +3009,29 @@ struct seq_operations slabinfo_op = {
.show = s_show,
};
+static void do_dump_slabp(kmem_cache_t *cachep)
+{
+#if DEBUG
+ struct list_head *q;
+
+ check_irq_on();
+ spin_lock_irq(&cachep->spinlock);
+ list_for_each(q,&cachep->lists.slabs_full) {
+ struct slab *slabp;
+ int i;
+ slabp = list_entry(q, struct slab, list);
+ for (i = 0; i < cachep->num; i++) {
+ unsigned long sym = slab_bufctl(slabp)[i];
+
+ printk("obj %p/%d: %p", slabp, i, (void *)sym);
+ print_symbol(" <%s>", sym);
+ printk("\n");
+ }
+ }
+ spin_unlock_irq(&cachep->spinlock);
+#endif
+}
+
#define MAX_SLABINFO_WRITE 128
/**
* slabinfo_write - Tuning for the slab allocator
@@ -3038,9 +3072,11 @@ ssize_t slabinfo_write(struct file *file
batchcount < 1 ||
batchcount > limit ||
shared < 0) {
- res = -EINVAL;
+ do_dump_slabp(cachep);
+ res = 0;
} else {
- res = do_tune_cpucache(cachep, limit,
batchcount, shared);
+ res = do_tune_cpucache(cachep, limit,
+ batchcount, shared);
}
break;
}
_
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
