![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
* Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: > Bart reported http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9991. He > assumed a memory leak in 32bit kernels when he analyzed the output of > /proc/meminfo. > > The leak is not a leak, it's an accounting bug. quicklists keep a > large amount of pages which are accounted as used memory. [...] > Another strange observation about quicklists is the imbalance of the > quicklists across CPUs. Running the above loop on a 2way machine I can > observe that the quicklist pages are acuumulating on one CPU. Stopping > and restarting the loop a couple of times can shift the accumulation > from one to the other CPU. hm. I think we should not let this much RAM hang around in a special-purpose allocator like quicklists. Shouldnt the quicklists be temporary in nature, and be trimmed much more agressively? in fact, we have a check_pgt_cache() call in cpu_idle(), which does: quicklist_trim(0, pgd_dtor, 25, 16); but it appears we dont do quicklist trimming anywhere else! So if a system has no idle time, the quicklist can grow unbounded, and that's a real memory leak IMO. Ingo | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2008-03-09 12:17 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||