From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754916AbYDIOa6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Apr 2008 10:30:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753266AbYDIOak (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Apr 2008 10:30:40 -0400 Received: from idcmail-mo1so.shaw.ca ([24.71.223.10]:2185 "EHLO pd2mo1so.prod.shaw.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753317AbYDIOaj (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Apr 2008 10:30:39 -0400 Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 08:32:27 -0600 From: Robert Hancock Subject: Re: VM - a plenty of inactive memory In-reply-to: To: Andreas Grimm Cc: Johannes Weiner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-id: <47FCD37B.3040103@shaw.ca> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andreas Grimm wrote: > Hi Johannes, > > i know this. But why the kernel locks that memory for a so long time > (2 days now)? Is there a way to enforce the reclaiming? And how can i > find out, which process owns that memory. The problem is, that i can't > accept, that the free memory fell down to 50MB, when i have 24GB in > the nirvana. The system was recently very close to the awkward > situation to swap to disk, and i bet it will do so in the next few > days, because it happened before. Unintelligible, if one got that much > ram. > > Bye, Andreas The memory should not be locked. If the kernel has no reason to reclaim the memory, it won't, though.