On 11/1/18 5:06 AM, Vovo Yang wrote: >> mlock() and ramfs usage are pretty easy to track down. /proc/$pid/smaps >> or /proc/meminfo can show us mlock() and good ol' 'df' and friends can >> show us ramfs the extent of pinned memory. >> >> With these, if we see "Unevictable" in meminfo bump up, we at least have >> a starting point to find the cause. >> >> Do we have an equivalent for i915? > AFAIK, there is no way to get i915 unevictable page count, some > modification to i915 debugfs is required. Is something like this feasible to add to this patch set before it gets merged? For now, it's probably easy to tell if i915 is at fault because if the unevictable memory isn't from mlock or ramfs, it must be i915. But, if we leave it as-is, it'll just defer the issue to the fourth user of the unevictable list, who will have to come back and add some debugging for this. Seems prudent to just do it now.
