From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965068AbVJUSXr (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:23:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965071AbVJUSXr (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:23:47 -0400 Received: from p4-7036.uk2net.com ([213.232.95.37]:53646 "EHLO churchillrandoms.co.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965068AbVJUSXq (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:23:46 -0400 Message-ID: <43593240.9020806@churchillrandoms.co.uk> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:24:00 -0700 From: Stefan Jones User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051003) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [BUG][2.6.13.4] Memoryleak - idr_layer_cache slab - inotify? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi all, I noticed this a while back when gam_server (new fam replacement) started playing up and the idr_layer_cache slab used up 300Mb of RAM. To reproduce: Run gnome and make sure it is using gam_server for fam. In one console do: while true ;do sleep 0.1 ; killall -w gam_server; done In another try slabtop and see the idr_layer_cache slab climb, eating memory (abit slowly). ( Gnome restarts gam_server after each kill for you and gets it doing stuff ) I looked though the source and inotify does use the idr_layer_cache slab and gam_server also uses inotify. Thank for your time, shall I use bugzilla.kernel or is this ok? More info needed? Stefan