Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On 4/17/07, Pavel Emelianov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The out_of_memory() function and SysRq-M handler call
>> show_mem() to show the current memory usage state.
>
> I am still somewhat unhappy about the spinlock, but I don't really
What's wrong with the spinlock? It
Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 19:34 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
>> +#define SHOW_TOP_SLABS 10
>
> Real minor nit on this one: SHOW_TOP_SLABS sounds like a bool. "Should
> I show the top slabs?"
>
> This might be a bit more clear:
>
> #define TOP_NR_SLABS_TO_SHOW 10
>
> or
>
On 4/17/07, Pavel Emelianov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The out_of_memory() function and SysRq-M handler call
show_mem() to show the current memory usage state.
I am still somewhat unhappy about the spinlock, but I don't really
have a better suggestion either. Other than that, looks good to me.
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 19:34 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> > +#define SHOW_TOP_SLABS 10
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Real minor nit on this one: SHOW_TOP_SLABS sounds like a bool. "Should
> I show the top slabs?"
>
> This might be a bit more clear:
>
> #define
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 19:34 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
+#define SHOW_TOP_SLABS 10
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, Dave Hansen wrote:
Real minor nit on this one: SHOW_TOP_SLABS sounds like a bool. Should
I show the top slabs?
This might be a bit more clear:
#define TOP_NR_SLABS_TO_SHOW 10
On 4/17/07, Pavel Emelianov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The out_of_memory() function and SysRq-M handler call
show_mem() to show the current memory usage state.
I am still somewhat unhappy about the spinlock, but I don't really
have a better suggestion either. Other than that, looks good to me.
Dave Hansen wrote:
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 19:34 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
+#define SHOW_TOP_SLABS 10
Real minor nit on this one: SHOW_TOP_SLABS sounds like a bool. Should
I show the top slabs?
This might be a bit more clear:
#define TOP_NR_SLABS_TO_SHOW 10
or
#define
Pekka Enberg wrote:
On 4/17/07, Pavel Emelianov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The out_of_memory() function and SysRq-M handler call
show_mem() to show the current memory usage state.
I am still somewhat unhappy about the spinlock, but I don't really
What's wrong with the spinlock? It exists
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 19:34 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> +#define SHOW_TOP_SLABS 10
Real minor nit on this one: SHOW_TOP_SLABS sounds like a bool. "Should
I show the top slabs?"
This might be a bit more clear:
#define TOP_NR_SLABS_TO_SHOW 10
or
#define NR_SLABS_TO_SHOW 10
-- Dave
-
To
The out_of_memory() function and SysRq-M handler call
show_mem() to show the current memory usage state.
This is also helpful to see which slabs are the largest
in the system.
Thanks Pekka for good idea of how to make it better.
The nr_pages is stored on kmem_list3 because:
1. as Eric pointed
The out_of_memory() function and SysRq-M handler call
show_mem() to show the current memory usage state.
This is also helpful to see which slabs are the largest
in the system.
Thanks Pekka for good idea of how to make it better.
The nr_pages is stored on kmem_list3 because:
1. as Eric pointed
On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 19:34 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
+#define SHOW_TOP_SLABS 10
Real minor nit on this one: SHOW_TOP_SLABS sounds like a bool. Should
I show the top slabs?
This might be a bit more clear:
#define TOP_NR_SLABS_TO_SHOW 10
or
#define NR_SLABS_TO_SHOW 10
-- Dave
-
To
12 matches
Mail list logo