I've successfully gotten through a rather large test suite --- Postgres buildfarm run, if you must know --- using NetBSD/hppa built from yesterday's HEAD/202205210400Z snapshot. (BTW, that's a pretty impressive milestone considering I've never been able to get any previous NetBSD release to even boot on this 9000/C360 hardware.)
However, I observe completely wacko reports from top(1) and ps(1) about the kernel's memory consumption. With the machine sitting idle post-run, top says load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00; up 0+19:01:17 12:37:47 19 processes: 18 sleeping, 1 on CPU CPU states: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 1.5% system, 0.0% interrupt, 98.5% idle Memory: 38M Act, 4852K Inact, 26M Wired, 8456K Exec, 32M File, 296M Free Swap: 1024M Total, 9068K Used, 1015M Free PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND 0 root 125 0 0K 79G vdrain 60:25 0.00% 0.00% [system] ... "79G"? This machine only has 512M RAM, plus the 1024M swap partition. The "Memory:" line is less obviously implausible, but it's still not right, because those numbers only sum to about 405M. "ps auxww" seems to be looking at the same incorrect estimate, though it presents it much differently: USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT STARTED TIME COMMAND root 0 0.0 15781.9 0 3050660 ? DKl 5:37PM 60:26.58 [system] ... ... or wait, that %MEM estimate tracks pretty closely with 79G, but that RSS value only means 3G doesn't it? These numbers appear to have crept up slowly since boot but then stabilized at what I'm showing here. I'm guessing some sort of pseudo-leak in memory accounting, but not actual memory consumption. This test suite is extremely file-access-heavy, so something wrong in vnode accounting could fit the facts perhaps. The suite ran a good deal slower than I was hoping for, almost double the time it takes under HP-UX on the same hardware, so I'm wondering if this bogus accounting is having real performance effects somewhere. For comparison's sake I looked at a nearby machine running 9.2/amd64, and there, top and ps agree that the kernel is using about 26M which seems generally sane. I wonder if anyone sees comparable follies elsewhere, or if this is somehow hppa-specific. Should I file a PR? regards, tom lane