From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:52:41 +0200 From: Ingo Oeser Subject: Re: Strange memory usage reporting Message-ID: <20030827095241.D639@nightmaster.csn.tu-chemnitz.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from hugh@veritas.com on Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 06:03:14PM +0100 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Jaroslav Kysela , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Hi, On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 06:03:14PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote: > Which is the driver involved? Though it's not wrong to give do_no_page > a Reserved page, beware of the the page->count accounting: while it's > Reserved, get_page or page_cache_get raises the count, but put_page > or page_cache_release does not decrement it - very easy to end up > with the page never freed. Why is this so asymetric? I would understand ignoring these pages in the freeing logic, but why exclude them also from refcounting? Regards Ingo Oeser -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: aart@kvack.org