public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>
To: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Memory Problem in 2.4.9 ?
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 12:43:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010822124322.708aec3d.skraw@ithnet.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010822010649Z16145-32383+774@humbolt.nl.linux.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33L.0108212146470.5646-100000@imladris.rielhome.conectiva> <20010822010649Z16145-32383+774@humbolt.nl.linux.org>

On Wed, 22 Aug 2001 03:13:23 +0200
Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net> wrote:

> Oops, yes, I forgot for the moment that we no longer age up in 
> __find_page_nolock.  Lets try this instead, which should capture the intended 
> effect of requiring 4 hits to activate a page (n.b., it's just a test):
> 
> --- ../2.4.9.clean/mm/filemap.c	Thu Aug 16 14:12:07 2001
> +++ ./mm/filemap.c	Wed Aug 22 02:02:24 2001
> @@ -980,10 +980,9 @@
>  static inline void check_used_once (struct page *page)
>  {
>  	if (!PageActive(page)) {
> -		if (page->age)
> +		if (++page->age >= 4)
>  			activate_page(page);
>  		else {
> -			page->age = PAGE_AGE_START;
>  			ClearPageReferenced(page);
>  		}
>  	}
> 

Ok. I applied this patch. What I experience is this:

meminfo Before test:

        total:    used:    free:  shared: buffers:  cached:
Mem:  921726976 87789568 833937408        0  6705152 37306368
Swap: 271392768        0 271392768
MemTotal:       900124 kB
MemFree:        814392 kB
MemShared:           0 kB
Buffers:          6548 kB
Cached:          36432 kB
SwapCached:          0 kB
Active:           2944 kB
Inact_dirty:     40036 kB
Inact_clean:         0 kB
Inact_target:      868 kB
HighTotal:           0 kB
HighFree:            0 kB
LowTotal:       900124 kB
LowFree:        814392 kB
SwapTotal:      265032 kB
SwapFree:       265032 kB

meminfo after test:
        total:    used:    free:  shared: buffers:  cached:
Mem:  921726976 918429696  3297280        0  9211904 792858624
Swap: 271392768        0 271392768
MemTotal:       900124 kB
MemFree:          3220 kB
MemShared:           0 kB
Buffers:          8996 kB
Cached:         774276 kB
SwapCached:          0 kB
Active:          46776 kB
Inact_dirty:    731852 kB
Inact_clean:      4644 kB
Inact_target:     8460 kB
HighTotal:           0 kB
HighFree:            0 kB
LowTotal:       900124 kB
LowFree:          3220 kB
SwapTotal:      265032 kB
SwapFree:       265032 kB

I see the cache grow slowly but constantly during file-copy. I stopped the test, when the first errors occured from NFS at client side (cp: /backup/Aug/day_18_10.gz: Stale NFS file handle). Interestingly the errors came up, when all physical memory was eaten up by the cache, the free section was very low, but no swapping occured (swap _is_ turned on).
I could copy 766389 kB in total which looks roughly like cached-value. I guess there is simply no release done. Does the aging algorithm really work (as expected)?

Regards, Stephan

  reply	other threads:[~2001-08-22 10:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-08-21 13:46 Memory Problem in 2.4.9 ? Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-08-21 14:33 ` Daniel Phillips
     [not found]   ` <20010821194140.43b46b10.skraw@ithnet.com>
     [not found]     ` <20010821174918Z16114-32383+718@humbolt.nl.linux.org>
2001-08-21 18:17       ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-08-21 19:10         ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-22  0:04           ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-08-22  0:43             ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-22  0:48               ` Rik van Riel
2001-08-22  1:13                 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-22 10:43                   ` Stephan von Krawczynski [this message]
     [not found]                   ` <Pine.LNX.4.33.0108220729380.280-100000@mikeg.weiden.de>
2001-08-22 11:01                     ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-08-22 17:22                       ` Mike Galbraith
2001-08-22 19:18                         ` Stephan von Krawczynski
2001-08-23  4:57                           ` Mike Galbraith
2001-08-22 11:52           ` Stephan von Krawczynski
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-08-22  4:47 Tommy Wu
2001-08-22 19:32 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-22 19:05   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-08-23  1:11     ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-23  0:10       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-08-23  2:29         ` Daniel Phillips
2001-08-23  1:19           ` Marcelo Tosatti

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20010822124322.708aec3d.skraw@ithnet.com \
    --to=skraw@ithnet.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=phillips@bonn-fries.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox