RE: [PATCH] [0/6] HUGETLB memory commitment
From: Chen, Kenneth W
Date: Mon Mar 29 2004 - 15:48:30 EST
>>>> Andy Whitcroft wrote on Mon, March 29, 2004 4:30 AM
> Indeed. The previous patches I submitted only address #1. Attached is
> another patch which should address #2, it supplies hugetlb commit
> accounting. This is checked and applied when the segment is created. It
> also supplements the meminfo information to display this new commitment.
> The patch only implments strict commitment, but as has been stated here
> often, it is not clear that overcommit of unswappable memory makes any
> sense in the absence of demand allocation. When that is implemented then
> this will likely need a policy.
> Patch applies on top of my previous patch and has been tested on i386.
+int hugetlbfs_report_meminfo(char *buf)
+ long htlb = atomic_read(&hugetlb_committed_space);
+ return sprintf(buf, "HugeCommited_AS: %5lu\n", htlb);
"HugeCommited_AS", typo?? Should that be double "t"? Also can we print
in terms of kB instead of num pages to match all other entries? Something
overcomit is not checked for hugetlb mmap, is it intentional here?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/