On Wednesday 13 April 2011, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 03:17:24PM +0000, Philipp Kern wrote: > > On 2011-04-13, David Goodenough <david.goodeno...@btconnect.com> wrote: > > > I am surprised at this. I have several boxes which are small single > > > board computers with solid state disks (MIDE or CF), so as I did not > > > need swap space (the running set is fixed and the memory requirement > > > was within the total available memory, I did not define any swap > > > space. A few days ago I needed to move one of the boxes I noted its > > > uptime at 594 days just before I switched it off. I grant you that it > > > has 256MB of memory, and 120MB is currently free, but I have not > > > noticed any problems growing over the time it was up. Maybe it just > > > did not need to make any large physically contiguous allocations. > > > > Given that Linux does paging, you normally don't need large physically > > contiguous allocations. I think the exceptions are mainly I/O regions > > for DMA. > > Heap allocations also have to be contiguous. And every thread needs a > kernel stack which is at least 2 contiguous pages on most architectures. > > > And you're probably not using that heavily on such a machine. Its acting as a network router. So presumably once everything is allocated, it keeps reusing them.
David > > Evidently. > > Ben. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201104131720.18057.david.goodeno...@btconnect.com
