| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <471707BD.4000203@sw.ru> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 11:14:05 +0400 From: Vasily Averin <vvs@...ru> To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au> CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, devel@...nvz.org Subject: Re: How Inactive may be much greather than cached? Nick Piggin wrote: > Hi, > > On Thursday 18 October 2007 16:24, Vasily Averin wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> could anybody explain how "inactive" may be much greater than "cached"? >> stress test (http://weather.ou.edu/~apw/projects/stress/) that writes into >> removed files in cycle puts the node to the following state: >> >> MemTotal: 16401648 kB >> MemFree: 636644 kB >> Buffers: 1122556 kB >> Cached: 362880 kB >> SwapCached: 700 kB >> Active: 1604180 kB >> Inactive: 13609828 kB >> >> At the first glance memory should be freed on file closing, nobody refers >> to file and ext3_delete_inode() truncates inode. We can see that memory is >> go away from "cached", however could somebody explain why it become >> "invalid" instead be freed? Who holds the references to these pages? > > Buffers, swap cache, and anonymous. But buffers and swap cache are low (1.1 Gb and 700kB in this example) and anonymous should go away when process finished. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists