Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265225AbUAERoB (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:44:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265233AbUAERoA (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:44:00 -0500 Received: from intra.cyclades.com ([64.186.161.6]:17840 "EHLO intra.cyclades.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265225AbUAERlr (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:41:47 -0500 Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:32:57 -0200 (BRST) From: Marcelo Tosatti X-X-Sender: marcelo@logos.cnet To: Mike Fedyk Cc: Alex Buell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, riel@redhat.com, arjanv@redhat.com Subject: Re: inode_cache / dentry_cache not being reclaimed aggressively enough on low-memory PCs In-Reply-To: <20040104072312.GM1882@matchmail.com> Message-ID: References: <20040103103023.77bf91b5.jlash@speakeasy.net> <20040103145557.369a12c4.akpm@osdl.org> <20040103190543.3b2d917f.akpm@osdl.org> <20040104072312.GM1882@matchmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Cyclades-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-Cyclades-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1617 Lines: 39 On Sat, 3 Jan 2004, Mike Fedyk wrote: > On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 07:05:43PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Alex Buell wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 3 Jan 2004, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > > John Lash wrote: > > > > > > > > > > As it stands, it will maintain as many unused entries as there are used entries. > > > > > If this low memory system las a large, stable, number of inuse dentry objects, > > > > > the unused entries will match it thereby holding double the memory and possibly > > > > > causing the problem you see. > > > > > > > > Yup. There is a fix in 2.6.1-rc1 for this. > > > > > > Which change would that be? It would be nice to back-port that to 2.4.x if > > > that's possible? > > > > It is not backportable. > > > > You could try increasing `count' in shrink_dcache_memory() and > > shrink_icache_memory(). Also you should be using 2.4.23 or later because > > it does have improvements in the memory reclaim area. > > Also, if there are any improvements considered for the 2.4 VM, it should be > on top of the -aa series. That's where the latest updates are, and it > doesn't make sence to work from a base that already has seperate > improvements available. The fix in -aa seems to reclaim inodes very aggressively. The 2.4 RH tree seems to contain a better version. Need to look into that. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/