On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:30 PM Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 11/1/18 5:06 AM, Vovo Yang wrote:
> >> mlock() and ramfs usage are pretty easy to track down. /proc/$pid/smaps
> >> or /proc/meminfo can show us mlock() and good ol' 'df' and friends can
> >&
Is there a way to check the amount of memory pinned by
i915_gem_object_get_pages_gtt(), it would be very helpful to check
system memory usage.
I think the pinned field in i915_gem_gtt has a different meaning and
doesn't indicate whether a gem object is pinned by
i915_gem_object_get_pages_gtt().
#
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 9:10 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
> OK, so that explain my question about the test case. Even though you
> generate a lot of page cache, the amount is still too small to trigger
> pagecache mostly reclaim and anon LRUs are scanned as well.
>
> Now to the difference with the previo
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:19 PM Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 10/31/18 1:19 AM, owner-linux...@kvack.org wrote:
> > -These are currently used in two places in the kernel:
> > +These are currently used in three places in the kernel:
> >
> > (1) By ramfs to mark the address spaces of its inodes when th
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:42 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 31-10-18 07:40:14, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > Didn't we create the unevictable lists in the first place because
> > scanning alone was observed to be so expensive in some scenarios?
>
> Yes, that is the case. I might just misunderstood the c
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 5:42 PM Chris Wilson wrote:
> Will do. As you are confident, I'll try a few different machines. :)
> -Chris
Great! Thanks for your help. :)
Vovo
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop
