From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 12:08:03 +0100 (BST) From: Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: 2.5.73-mm2 In-Reply-To: <20030701105134.GE26348@holomorphy.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: William Lee Irwin III Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 11:46:34AM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > If you pursued it, wouldn't your patch also need to change > > nr_free_buffer_pages() to do what you think it does, count > > the free lowmem pages? It, and nr_free_pagecache_pages(), > > and nr_free_zone_pages(), are horribly badly named. They > > count present_pages-pages_high, they don't count free pages: > > okay for initialization estimates, useless for anything dynamic. > > Well, I was mostly looking for getting handed back 0 when lowmem is > empty; I actually did realize they didn't give entirely accurate counts > of free lowmem pages. I'm not pleading for complete accuracy, but nr_free_buffer_pages() will never hand back 0 (if your system managed to boot). It's a static count of present_pages (adjusted), not of free pages. Or am I misreading nr_free_zone_pages()? Hugh -- 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