Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 20:25:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 20:25:36 -0500 Received: from garrincha.netbank.com.br ([200.203.199.88]:39947 "HELO netbank.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 20:25:28 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 23:25:12 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: To: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: RE: i686 SMP systems with more then 12 GB ram with 2.4.x kernel, cache buffer bug ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > > It seems that the kernel does a good job of releasing dcache or icache, > > but the buffer_heads are filling up the released mem. > > In terms of "control knobs", would a limit on page cache size imply a > limit on "buffer_heads", or do we really need the control knob on > "buffer_heads" and not on the page cache? Or would we need both? We can just remove the buffer heads from the page cache pages without any problem (except that on writeback we have to look up where exactly the page should be written to on disk). regards, Rik -- "Linux holds advantages over the single-vendor commercial OS" -- Microsoft's "Competing with Linux" document http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ - 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/