(2012/11/15 22:47), Glauber Costa wrote: > On 11/15/2012 01:41 PM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote: >> (2012/11/15 11:54), Glauber Costa wrote: >>> The idea is to synchronously do it, leaving it up to the shrinking >>> facilities in vmscan.c and/or others. Not actively retrying shrinking >>> may leave the caches alive for more time, but it will remove the ugly >>> wakeups. One would argue that if the caches have free objects but are >>> not being shrunk, it is because we don't need that memory yet. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> CC: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> >>> CC: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> CC: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> I agree this patch but can we have a way to see the number of unaccounted >> zombie cache usage for debugging ? >> >> Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Any particular interface in mind ? > Hmm, it's debug interface and having cgroup file may be bad..... If it can be seen in bytes or some, /proc/vmstat ? out_of_track_slabs xxxxxxx. hm ? Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>