[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801051202480.14866@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 12:05:58 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
zanussi@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] procfs: provide slub's /proc/slabinfo
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> So, I have this silly memory profiler derived from the kleak patches by
> the relayfs people and would love to try it out on an embedded workload
> where SLUB memory footprint is terrible. Any suggestions?
Good idea. But have you tried to look at slabinfo?
Try to run
slabinfo -t
which will calculate the allocation overhead of the currently allocated
objects in all slab caches.
One problem: The actual size of kmalloc'ed objects is not available so it
does not calculate the overhead that comes about because of rounding. Your
approach would cover that as well but I think we could also add a debug
mode in which we store the actual size of a kmalloc object and export the
information via sysfs. Would be nicer than adding this whole additional
layer.
--
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