![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 06:25:51PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > Hi Bharata, > > On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 07:06:35PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote: > > Marcelo, > > > > Here's my next attempt in breaking the "slabs_scanned" from /proc/vmstat > > into meaningful per cache statistics. Now I have the statistics counters > > as percpu. [an issue remaining is that there are more than one cache as > > part of mbcache and they all have a common shrinker routine and I am > > displaying the collective shrinker stats info on each of them in > > /proc/slabinfo ==> some kind of duplication] > > Looks good to me! IMO it should be a candidate for -mm/mainline. > > Nothing useful to suggest on the mbcache issue... sorry. Thanks Marcelo for reviewing. <snip> > > > > [root@llm09 bharata]# grep shrinker /proc/slabinfo > > # name <active_objs> <num_objs> <objsize> <objperslab> <pagesperslab> : tunables <limit> <batchcount> <sharedfactor> : slabdata <active_slabs> <num_slabs> <sharedavail> : shrinker stat <nr requested> <nr freed> > > ext3_xattr 0 0 48 78 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 0 0 0 : shrinker stat 0 0 > > dquot 0 0 160 24 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 0 0 0 : shrinker stat 0 0 > > inode_cache 1301 1390 400 10 1 : tunables 54 27 8 : slabdata 139 139 0 : shrinker stat 682752 681900 > > dentry_cache 82110 114452 152 26 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 4402 4402 0 : shrinker stat 1557760 760100 > > > > [root@llm09 bharata]# grep slabs_scanned /proc/vmstat > > slabs_scanned 2240512 > > > > [root@llm09 bharata]# cat /proc/sys/fs/dentry-state > > 82046 75369 45 0 3599 0 > > [The order of dentry-state o/p is like this: > > total dentries in dentry hash list, total dentries in lru list, age limit, > > want_pages, inuse dentries in lru list, dummy] > > > > So, we can see that with low memory pressure, even though the > > shrinker runs on dcache repeatedly, not many dentries are freed > > by dcache. And dcache lru list still has huge number of free > > dentries. > > The success/attempt ratio is about 1/2, which seems alright? > Hmm... when compared to inode_cache, I felt dcache shrinker wasn't doing a good job. Anyway I will analyze further to see if things can be made better with the existing shrinker. Regards, Bharata. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-10-07 06:15 [W:0.681 / U:0.070 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | ||||||||||