Re: Why task_struct slab can't be released back to buddy system?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Apr 29 2015, Zhang Zhen <zhenzhang.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Our x86 system has crashed because oom.
> We found task_struct slabs ate much memory.

I can't explain what you've seen, but a simple way to reduce the
memory footprint of struct task_struct is

CONFIG_LATENCYTOP=n

That will reduce sizeof(struct task_struct) by ~3840 bytes (60%, give or
take).

Rasmus

> CACHE    	  NAME                 OBJSIZE  ALLOCATED     TOTAL  SLABS  SSIZE          //**Slabs is much larger than alloctated object counts**
> ffff88081e007500 task_struct             6528       4639    229775  45955    32k

--
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>




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]