From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 11:05:38 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: print cma-reserved pages from show_mem In-Reply-To: <20150413100425.GB14842@suse.de> References: <20150326114612.GD8656@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20150326123028.GM4701@suse.de> <35FD53F367049845BC99AC72306C23D104A310D42397@CNBJMBX05.corpusers.net> <20150410112430.GB12732@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20150413010913.GA15225@corellia.local> <20150413012115.GB15225@corellia.local> <20150413095645.GQ12732@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20150413100425.GB14842@suse.de> Message-ID: <20150413100538.GR12732@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 11:04:26AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 10:56:45AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 06:21:15PM -0700, Gregory Fong wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 06:09:13PM -0700, Gregory Fong wrote: > > > > And now we see 83 slab_reclaimable + 846 slab_unreclaimable adds up > > > > correctly to the total of 929. > > > > > > > > The patch below will end up with the correct count. > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, messed up the patch formatting. Here it is fixed: > > > > So now the question is: do we fix this, or do we use the generic version? > > Given that the total number of slab pages can be easily deduced from the > > generic statistics, do we need to modify the generic version to print an > > additional line with this? > > Whatever ARM decides, I do not think the generic version needs to do > a PFN walk to recaluate the SLAB statistics. The slab_reclaimable and > slab_unreclaimable stats based on the vmstat counters is sufficient. Yes, I agree. My feeling is we just switch to the generic version and be done with it. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net.