From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265230AbTLRPkw (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2003 10:40:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265232AbTLRPkw (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2003 10:40:52 -0500 Received: from 213-145-178-72.dd.nextgentel.com ([213.145.178.72]:63786 "EHLO terminal124.gozu.lan") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265230AbTLRPks (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2003 10:40:48 -0500 To: Mike Fedyk Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.4 Rmap] Add Inactive to /proc/meminfo was: Mem: and Swap: lines in /proc/meminfo References: <11HNp-oH-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <11I6J-UO-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <13yZr-2nX-23@gated-at.bofh.it> From: s864@ii.uib.no (Ronny V. Vindenes) Date: 18 Dec 2003 16:40:12 +0100 In-Reply-To: <13yZr-2nX-23@gated-at.bofh.it> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mike Fedyk writes: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 03:05:11PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 05:42:46PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Mike Fedyk wrote: > > > > > > > Inact_dirty: 21516 kB > > > > Inact_laundry: 65612 kB > > > > Inact_clean: 19812 kB > > > > > > > > These three are seperate lists in rmap, and are equal to "Inactive:" in > > > > the -aa vm. > > > > > > I should add an Inactive: list to -rmap that sums up all > > > 3, to make it a bit easier on programs parsing /proc. > > > > > > > ISTR, asking for this a while ago ;) > > > > Yes, please do add that Inactive: line to rmap. :) > > How's this patch? > > --- proc_misc.c.orig 2003-12-16 17:03:45.000000000 -0800 > +++ proc_misc.c 2003-12-16 17:04:28.000000000 -0800 > @@ -189,6 +189,7 @@ > "Active: %8u kB\n" > "ActiveAnon: %8u kB\n" > "ActiveCache: %8u kB\n" > + "Inactive: %8u kB\n" > "Inact_dirty: %8u kB\n" > "Inact_laundry:%8u kB\n" > "Inact_clean: %8u kB\n" > @@ -208,6 +209,8 @@ > K(nr_active_anon_pages()) + K(nr_active_cache_pages()), > K(nr_active_anon_pages()), > K(nr_active_cache_pages()), > + K(nr_inactive_dirty_pages()) + K(nr_inactive_dirty_pages()) ^^^^^ Shouldn't that be nr_inactive_clean_pages() ? now it's 2*dirty + laundry > + + K(nr_inactive_laundry_pages()), > K(nr_inactive_dirty_pages()), > K(nr_inactive_laundry_pages()), > K(nr_inactive_clean_pages()), > - -- Ronny V. Vindenes