On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 02:58:04AM +, Nag Avadhanam (nag) wrote:
Its the calculation of the # of bytes of non-reclaimable file system cache
pages that has been troubling us. We do not want to count inactive file
pages (of programs/binaries) that were
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 03:52:31PM -0800, Daniel Walker wrote:
On 02/15/2016 03:05 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
What you are proposing isn't accurate, either, because it will be
stale by the time the inode cache traversal is completed and the
count returned
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 02:58:04AM +, Nag Avadhanam (nag) wrote:
> Its the calculation of the # of bytes of non-reclaimable file system cache
> pages that has been troubling us. We do not want to count inactive file
> pages (of programs/binaries) that were once mapped by any process in the
> sy
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 03:52:31PM -0800, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On 02/15/2016 03:05 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >What you are proposing isn't accurate, either, because it will be
> >stale by the time the inode cache traversal is completed and the
> >count returned to userspace. e.g. pages that have
We have a class of platforms that are essentially swap-less embedded
systems that have limited memory resources (2GB and less).
There is a need to implement early alerts (before the OOM killer kicks in)
based on the current memory usage so admins can take appropriate steps (do
not initiate provisi
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 03:52:31PM -0800, Daniel Walker wrote:
> >>We need it to determine accurately what the free memory in the
> >>system is. If you know where we can get this information already
> >>please tell, we aren't aware of it. For instance /proc/meminfo isn't
> >>accurate enough.
>
> A
On 02/15/2016 03:05 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 10:19:54AM -0800, Daniel Walker wrote:
On 02/14/2016 01:18 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 12:14:39PM -0800, Daniel Walker wrote:
From: Khalid Mughal
Currently there is no way to figure out the droppable page
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 10:19:54AM -0800, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On 02/14/2016 01:18 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 12:14:39PM -0800, Daniel Walker wrote:
> >>From: Khalid Mughal
> >>
> >>Currently there is no way to figure out the droppable pagecache size
> >>from the meminfo
On 02/14/2016 01:18 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 12:14:39PM -0800, Daniel Walker wrote:
From: Khalid Mughal
Currently there is no way to figure out the droppable pagecache size
from the meminfo output. The MemFree size can shrink during normal
system operation, when some of
Hi Jon,
Comments below
On 16-02-15 09:43 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 18:12:58 -0800
Florian Fainelli wrote:
As is now common in a lot of organization having an internal code review
process (be it through Gerritt or other tools), patches extracted from
this review process a
On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 18:12:58 -0800
Florian Fainelli wrote:
> As is now common in a lot of organization having an internal code review
> process (be it through Gerritt or other tools), patches extracted from
> this review process and submitted to public mailing-lists will have
> pre-existing Revie
Hi Alan,
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 2:17 PM, atull wrote:
>> > > I looked into it further and now I've got a solution for this issue
>> > > that I can post soon. I can stop using the DT overlay configfs
>> > > interface and add a sysfs file for applying an overlay to an FPGA
>> > > region. The FP
On Thu, 11 Feb 2016, Justin Keller wrote:
> Hello,
> I have a small patch to the memory-hotplug documentation. One line
> adds a comma, and the other line adds an and.
>
> Justin Keller
Justin,
your patch is missing a Signed-off-by: line (please read
Documentation/SubmittingPatches) and also y
13 matches
Mail list logo
