lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [Bug #12210] 2.6.28-rc8 big regression in VM
    Hi Lukas,

    On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 08:06:36PM +0200, Lukas Hejtmanek wrote:
    > Hello,
    >
    > you may remember that I reported regression in VM. I used you filecache module
    > and discovered that the leaks are caused by these items:
    > # filecache 1.0
    > # ino size cached cached% refcnt state dev file
    > 167302 16 16 100 1 d- 00:08(tmpfs) /drm\040mm\040object\040(deleted)
    > 167301 16 16 100 1 d- 00:08(tmpfs) /drm\040mm\040object\040(deleted)
    > 167300 16 16 100 1 d- 00:08(tmpfs) /drm\040mm\040object\040(deleted)
    > 167299 4 4 100 1 -- 00:08(tmpfs) /drm\040mm\040object\040(deleted)
    > 167290 8 8 100 1 -- 00:08(tmpfs) /drm\040mm\040object\040(deleted)
    > 167289 8 8 100 1 -- 00:08(tmpfs) /drm\040mm\040object\040(deleted)
    > 167288 16 16 100 1 -- 00:08(tmpfs) /drm\040mm\040object\040(deleted)
    > 167287 16 16 100 1 d- 00:08(tmpfs) /drm\040mm\040object\040(deleted)
    >
    > there are tons of those items:
    > cat /proc/filecache | grep drm | wc -l
    > 14224
    >
    > Do you have any clues what happens here? Is it a bug in kernel VM system or it
    > is more likely a bug in Intel's GEM drm driver? Right now it results in 500MB
    > of undropable cache.

    Could you provide the full filecache listing(the 'size' field may
    provide some info), and the contents in /proc/dri/0/*?

    > Also lsof reports many leaked file descriptors:
    > lsof | grep drm | wc -l
    > 7326

    Simply being "deleted" does not mean that they are leaked files.
    shmem files are special.

    Thanks,
    Fengguang



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-03-03 03:19    [W:0.037 / U:121.016 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site