On Tuesday 28 August 2007 01:10, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > There is a nice LWN article on this issue: > > > ELC: How much memory are applications really using? > > > http://lwn.net/Articles/230975/ > > > > > > Another helpful patch could be: > > > maps: PSS(proportional set size) accounting in smaps > > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/19/23 > > > > Thanks a lot, very useful pages indeed. > > > > However they still don't explain how I can avoid counting memory > > twice for /proc/PID1 and /proc/PID2 when PID2 is a child of PID1, > > created with CLONE_VM. > > > > The example: I allocate 1234k, dirty it, then clone with CLONE_VM. > > I will seemingly have two processes, each using 1234k, _privately_ > > (i.e., pages are not shown as shared in smaps) - > > which is technically correct, pages are not shared with other VMs, > > but they ARE shared by means of these two processes having the same VM! > > > > How userspace tools can figure out that these processes have shared VM? > > > > IOW: do we need "VMsharecount: N" in addition to "Threads: N" > > in /proc/PID/status? > > A full solution would require two parameters, i.e. VmUsers/VmMagic. > > But please make sure the new lines won't break important tools like > ps/top/pmaps/...
Should be safe - tools skip lines they do not recognize. Ok, we have "Threads: N". I can cook up a patch which adds count of processes which share VM with us - it's just atomic_read(¤t->mm->mm_users). What name do you like? SharedVmCount: N VmUsers: N other? -- vda - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
