From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 01:59:13 -0800 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: removing mm->rss and mm->anon_rss from kernel? Message-ID: <20041106095913.GB2890@holomorphy.com> References: <4189EC67.40601@yahoo.com.au> <418AD329.3000609@yahoo.com.au> <418AE0F0.5050908@yahoo.com.au> <418AE9BB.1000602@yahoo.com.au> <1099622957.29587.101.camel@gaston> <418C55A7.9030100@yahoo.com.au> <418C9DFF.5010809@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <418C9DFF.5010809@yahoo.com.au> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Christoph Lameter , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Hugh Dickins , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ia64@kernel.vger.org List-ID: On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 08:48:47PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > Seems like a pretty good idea to me. Optimising the fast path is what we've > always done, especially when keeping /proc stats. Maybe this would make the > /proc cost prohibitive though? (Hopefully not). > What I was thinking of doing was to keep per-CPU magazines, and use them to > amortise operations to a global atomic counter. That would drift, be > inaccurate, and possibly go negative (without more logic). Obviously far > more unwieldily (and basically crap) compared to your elegant solution. Doing all the statistics by walking through a process' virtual memory from /proc/ routines was what we started with in 2.4 Reverting it all is a huge step backward. It was done because the /proc/ cost is in fact prohibitive. And, of course, I fully appreciate being omitted from the thread dedicated to backing out my work. -- wli -- 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