linux-kernel - Re: kswapd0 inefficient?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:52:38 +1000
From:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To:	Richard Jelinek <rj@...amem.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: 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 %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
>  5954 root       0 -20     0    0    0 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     0    0    0 S    8  0.0  10:21.82 kswapd0
>  6011 root      10  -5     0    0    0 D    6  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 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/