Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 3 Mar 2009 10:16:02 +0800 | | From | Wu Fengguang <> | | Subject | Re: [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
|  |