Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:33:59 +0100
From:      J B <jb.1234abcd@gmail.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD 8.2 - active plus inactive memory leak!?
Message-ID:  <CAJXMFhHyyanD4UH9+NqN7=E=PA_vs9YFP2vVR+xqF8ABRoteRg@mail.gmail.com>

Next in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 10:23:38 +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 12:36:21AM +0000, Luke Marsden wrote:
> ...
>> I'm trying to confirm that, on a system with no pages swapped out, that
>> the following is a true statement:
>>
>>         a page is accounted for in active + inactive if and only if it
>>         corresponds to one or more of the pages accounted for in the
>>         resident memory lists of all the processes on the system (as
>>         per the output of 'top' and 'ps')
> No.
>
> The pages belonging to vnode vm object can be active or inactive or
> cached but not mapped into any process address space.

I wonder if some ideas by Denys Vlasenko contained in this thread
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel/157706
would be useful ?

...
"Today, I'm looking at my process list, sorted by amount of dirtied pages
(which very closely matches amount of malloced and used space - that is,
malloced, but not-written to memory areas are not included).
This is the most expensive type of pages, they can't be discarded.
If we would be in memory squeeze, kernel will have to swap them out,
if swap exists, otherwise kernel can't do anything at all."
...
"Note that any shared pages (such as glibc) are not freed this way;
also, non-mapped pages (such as large, but unused malloced space, or large,
but unused file mappings) also do not contribute to MemFree increase."

jb



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJXMFhHyyanD4UH9+NqN7=E=PA_vs9YFP2vVR+xqF8ABRoteRg>