Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 21 Jul 2002 16:45:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 21 Jul 2002 16:45:27 -0400 Received: from mail.s3.kth.se ([130.237.48.5]:23055 "EHLO elixir.e.kth.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 21 Jul 2002 16:45:26 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: memory leak? References: <1027269224.17234.101.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> From: mru@users.sourceforge.net (=?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?=) Date: 21 Jul 2002 22:48:33 +0200 In-Reply-To: Alan Cox's message of "21 Jul 2002 17:33:44 +0100" Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) XEmacs/21.1 (Channel Islands) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 904 Lines: 18 Alan Cox writes: > > > This memory will be reclaimed when the system needs it. > > > > Does this mean that free and /proc/meminfo are incorrect? > > By its own definition proc/meminfo is correct. top could go rummaging in > /proc/slabinfo but its questionable if it is meaningful to do so. The > actually "out of memory" case for a virtual memory system is not "no > memory pages free" nor "no memory or swap free" its closer to "working > set plus i/o buffers exceeds memory size". Why can't proc/meminfo report these caches as cached instead of plain used? Would that be incorrect somehow? -- M?ns Rullg?rd mru@users.sf.net - 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/