From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758927AbYHONc1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2008 09:32:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758478AbYHONcQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2008 09:32:16 -0400 Received: from extu-mxob-1.symantec.com ([216.10.194.28]:55615 "EHLO extu-mxob-1.symantec.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758336AbYHONcO (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2008 09:32:14 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:32:15 +0100 (BST) From: Hugh Dickins X-X-Sender: hugh@blonde.site To: Andi Kleen cc: Ingo Molnar , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix /proc/meminfo DirectMap In-Reply-To: <20080815131530.GG19125@one.firstfloor.org> Message-ID: References: <20080815131530.GG19125@one.firstfloor.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 15 Aug 2008, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 01:58:32PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > Do we actually want these DirectMap lines in the x86 /proc/meminfo? > > I can see they're interesting to CPA developers and TLB optimizers, > > but they don't fit its usual "where has all my memory gone?" usage. > > It was intended for the "why is my computer going slower" usage. Yes, that's what I meant by the TLB optimizers. But it's going to be a fractional effect, isn't it, when you're trying to get the last 1% out of the machine? And in such a case, you might wonder more what all the 4k ones are actually being used for (no problem at all if they've ended up behind vmalloced module text). Hugh