Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:40:50 +1100 | From | CaT <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.24-rc7: memory leak? |
| |
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 12:22:03PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 17:34 +1100, CaT wrote: > > cache). During the rsync the memory used grew to just shy of 1.6gig and > > now, about 2 hours after the rsync has well and truly finished, the used > > memory is at 1.23gig. This is what free reports: > > > > total used free shared buffers cached > > Mem: 2058128 1994468 63660 0 688604 11432 > > -/+ buffers/cache: 1294432 763696 > > Swap: 1048568 0 1048568 > > How much memory does: > > echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches > > gain you?
56M used now. Should all this cache usage not be counted towards the 'Cached' entry in meminfo rather then getting counted as part of used ram. I assume that this would not cause an oom situation and would be freed up if all that memory really did need to be used.
> > ext3_inode_cache 1235577 1240565 768 5 1 : tunables 54 27 8 : slabdata 248113 248113 0 > > dentry 703661 749797 200 19 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 39463 39463 0 > > buffer_head 174535 209087 104 37 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 5651 5651 0 > > would get freed by doing that.
They were indeed.
> this one: > > > size-64 537590 850249 64 59 1 : tunables 120 60 8 : slabdata 14411 14411 0 > > I'm unsure about, if that one sticks around that'd be something to worry > about. See if you can monitor this value and try to determine:
This went away also.
> - if it ever drops > - what makes it grow (fastest) > > I guess we could stick some instrumentation in there to track that > bucket.
Might help prevent upraised eyebrows or worse. :)
-- "To the extent that we overreact, we proffer the terrorists the greatest tribute." - High Court Judge Michael Kirby
| |