From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752501AbcBLSSW (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 12 Feb 2016 13:18:22 -0500
Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:7661 "EHLO mga09.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751103AbcBLSSU (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 12 Feb 2016 13:18:20 -0500
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,436,1449561600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="910899953"
Subject: Re: computing drop-able caches
To: Daniel Walker <danielwa@cisco.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, "Khalid Mughal (khalidm)" <khalidm@cisco.com>,
        "xe-kernel@external.cisco.com" <xe-kernel@external.cisco.com>
References: <56AAA77D.7090000@cisco.com> <56BE1F2A.30103@intel.com>
 <56BE2135.5040407@cisco.com>
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Message-ID: <56BE21EC.6030708@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 10:18:20 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56BE2135.5040407@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 02/12/2016 10:15 AM, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On 02/12/2016 10:06 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> On 01/28/2016 03:42 PM, Daniel Walker wrote:
>>> My colleague Khalid and I are working on a patch which will provide a
>>> /proc file to output the size of the drop-able page cache.
>>> One way to implement this is to use the current drop_caches /proc
>>> routine, but instead of actually droping the caches just add
>>> up the amount.
>> Code, please.
> 
> We have a process for release code which doesn't allow us to send it
> immediately. B

OK, how about we continue this discussion once you can release it?