Re: [PATCH] trim memory not covered by WB MTRRs

On Wednesday, June 6, 2007 3:03 pm Justin Piszcz wrote:
> Mem:   8039620k total,  7936472k used,   103148k free,      708k
> buffers Mem:   8039608k total,   969380k used,  7070228k free,    
> 1232k buffers
>
> I am curious, why does the patch != the mem=8832M?

I'm not sure... can you post your e820 map from boot and the contents 
of /proc/mtrr?  Maybe my patch is trimming off a few too many pages, or 
maybe 8832M isn't quite right and actually ends up leaving you with a 
few uncached pages.

Jesse
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] trim memory not covered by WB MTRRs
    • From: Justin Piszcz <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] trim memory not covered by WB MTRRs
    • From: Justin Piszcz <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] trim memory not covered by WB MTRRs
    • From: Jesse Barnes <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] trim memory not covered by WB MTRRs
    • From: Justin Piszcz <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] trim memory not covered by WB MTRRs
    • From: Justin Piszcz <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] trim memory not covered by WB MTRRs
• Next by Date: Re: [stable] patch sysfs-store-sysfs-inode-nrs-in-s_ino-to-avoid-readdir-oopses.patch queued to -stable tree
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] trim memory not covered by WB MTRRs
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] trim memory not covered by WB MTRRs
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]