Re: kswapd0 inefficient?
On Friday 19 October 2007 08:05, Richard Jelinek wrote: > Hello guys, > > I'm not subscribed to this list, so if you find this question valid > enough to answer it, please cc me. Thanks. > > This is what the top-output looks like on my machine after having > copied about 550GB of data from a twofish256 crypted disk to a raid > array: > -- > Mem: 8178452k total, 8132180k used,46272k free, 2743480k buffers > Swap:0k total,0k used,0k free, 4563032k cached > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND > 5954 root 0 -20 000 R 62 0.0 96:42.61 loop0 > 6014 root 18 0 23744 19m 484 R 20 0.2 25:45.31 cp > 255 root 10 -5 000 S8 0.0 10:21.82 kswapd0 > 6011 root 10 -5 000 D6 0.0 4:15.66 kjournald > ...yadda yadda... > -- > > And what do we see here? We see loop0 and cp eating up some > time. That's ok for me considered the work they do. kjournald is also > ok for me, but I ask myself: why the heck has kswapd0 crunched 10+ > minutes of CPU time? > > I mean what does kswapd0 do? > http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/linux-kernel/65380-what-does-kswapd0-do.ht >ml > > And I have no swap - right? So it should just shut up - IMHO. Or am I > missing something? kswapd also reclaims pagecache, not just anonymous memory. It runs in response to memory pressure and if it wasn't around, then all your apps requesting memory would have to do basically the same amount of work themselves. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
kswapd0 inefficient?
Hello guys, I'm not subscribed to this list, so if you find this question valid enough to answer it, please cc me. Thanks. This is what the top-output looks like on my machine after having copied about 550GB of data from a twofish256 crypted disk to a raid array: -- Mem: 8178452k total, 8132180k used,46272k free, 2743480k buffers Swap:0k total,0k used,0k free, 4563032k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND 5954 root 0 -20 000 R 62 0.0 96:42.61 loop0 6014 root 18 0 23744 19m 484 R 20 0.2 25:45.31 cp 255 root 10 -5 000 S8 0.0 10:21.82 kswapd0 6011 root 10 -5 000 D6 0.0 4:15.66 kjournald ...yadda yadda... -- And what do we see here? We see loop0 and cp eating up some time. That's ok for me considered the work they do. kjournald is also ok for me, but I ask myself: why the heck has kswapd0 crunched 10+ minutes of CPU time? I mean what does kswapd0 do? http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/linux-kernel/65380-what-does-kswapd0-do.html And I have no swap - right? So it should just shut up - IMHO. Or am I missing something? kind regards, Marcel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: kswapd0 inefficient?
On Friday 19 October 2007 08:05, Richard Jelinek wrote: Hello guys, I'm not subscribed to this list, so if you find this question valid enough to answer it, please cc me. Thanks. This is what the top-output looks like on my machine after having copied about 550GB of data from a twofish256 crypted disk to a raid array: -- Mem: 8178452k total, 8132180k used,46272k free, 2743480k buffers Swap:0k total,0k used,0k free, 4563032k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND 5954 root 0 -20 000 R 62 0.0 96:42.61 loop0 6014 root 18 0 23744 19m 484 R 20 0.2 25:45.31 cp 255 root 10 -5 000 S8 0.0 10:21.82 kswapd0 6011 root 10 -5 000 D6 0.0 4:15.66 kjournald ...yadda yadda... -- And what do we see here? We see loop0 and cp eating up some time. That's ok for me considered the work they do. kjournald is also ok for me, but I ask myself: why the heck has kswapd0 crunched 10+ minutes of CPU time? I mean what does kswapd0 do? http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/linux-kernel/65380-what-does-kswapd0-do.ht ml And I have no swap - right? So it should just shut up - IMHO. Or am I missing something? kswapd also reclaims pagecache, not just anonymous memory. It runs in response to memory pressure and if it wasn't around, then all your apps requesting memory would have to do basically the same amount of work themselves. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
kswapd0 inefficient?
Hello guys, I'm not subscribed to this list, so if you find this question valid enough to answer it, please cc me. Thanks. This is what the top-output looks like on my machine after having copied about 550GB of data from a twofish256 crypted disk to a raid array: -- Mem: 8178452k total, 8132180k used,46272k free, 2743480k buffers Swap:0k total,0k used,0k free, 4563032k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND 5954 root 0 -20 000 R 62 0.0 96:42.61 loop0 6014 root 18 0 23744 19m 484 R 20 0.2 25:45.31 cp 255 root 10 -5 000 S8 0.0 10:21.82 kswapd0 6011 root 10 -5 000 D6 0.0 4:15.66 kjournald ...yadda yadda... -- And what do we see here? We see loop0 and cp eating up some time. That's ok for me considered the work they do. kjournald is also ok for me, but I ask myself: why the heck has kswapd0 crunched 10+ minutes of CPU time? I mean what does kswapd0 do? http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/linux-kernel/65380-what-does-kswapd0-do.html And I have no swap - right? So it should just shut up - IMHO. Or am I missing something? kind regards, Marcel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
