On 02/16/2010 04:22 PM, Rik van Riel wrote: > On 02/16/2010 04:26 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: > >> For the backtrace scenario I posted it seems like it might actually be >> release_pages(). There seems to be a plausible call chain: >> >> __ClearPageLRU >> release_pages >> free_pages_and_swap_cache >> tlb_flush_mmu >> tlb_remove_page >> zap_pte_range >> >> Does that seem right? In this case, tlb_remove_page() is called right >> after page_remove_rmap() which ultimately results in clearing the >> PageAnon bit. > > That is right - and pinpoints the fault for the memory leak > on some third party code that fails to release a refcount on > memory pages. I think I've tracked down the source of the problem. Turns out one of our vendors had misapplied a patch which ended up bumping the page count an extra time. Thanks to everyone that helped out. Chris -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>