Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

Export some UMA info via sysctl.
ClosedPublic

Authored by markj on Jun 4 2019, 3:31 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Tue, Nov 5, 6:13 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Nov 2, 8:33 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Fri, Nov 1, 5:19 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Oct 21 2024, 1:41 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Oct 12 2024, 10:31 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Oct 11 2024, 2:49 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Oct 6 2024, 11:39 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Oct 4 2024, 8:34 PM
Subscribers

Details

Summary

These show the total amount of memory used for UMA slabs, and the limit
on such memory.

Diff Detail

Lint
Lint Passed
Unit
No Test Coverage
Build Status
Buildable 24683
Build 23451: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

sys/vm/uma_core.c
151

Is uma_kmem_limit also something that ought to be accessed and modified atomically?

154

Consider making the initial value of 0 explicit here.

sys/vm/uma_core.c
3816

Why do you need this atomic ? Esp. since sysctl handler would not use volatile qualification.

sys/vm/uma_core.c
151

I don't think it's necessary: currently it's set only once, during boot time.

154

Hmm, conventionally we omit the explicit zero-initialization when the variable is initialized later (early during boot in this case). For, e.g., a sysctl setting where 0 means off (default) and 1 means on, I would use an explicit initializer of 0.

3816

I did it because I removed the volatile qualifier from the var. All of its other accesses are via atomic_* so I prefer to be consistent here.

sys/vm/uma_core.c
151

Because uma_set_limit is called only once, during boot time. Maybe a comment somewhere should explain that.

So why initialize to LONG_MAX? Why not just

static unslgned long uma_kmem_limit; /* initialized by uma_set_limit(). */

sys/vm/uma_core.c
151

I will add a comment.

We initialize to LONG_MAX so that UMA allocations can succeed before uma_set_limit() is called. If it were initialized to zero, such allocations would always fail because uma_avail() would return zero.

kib added inline comments.
sys/vm/uma_core.c
3816

As I noted, sysctl would not access it as volatile.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Jun 4 2019, 4:59 PM
sys/vm/uma_core.c
3816

Sorry, I see. The change is indeed unrelated to my original purpose of adding sysctls. I will commit that part separately.

Add a comment for uma_kmem_limit.

This revision now requires review to proceed.Jun 4 2019, 7:35 PM
markj marked an inline comment as done.Jun 4 2019, 7:37 PM
markj added inline comments.
sys/vm/uma_core.c
151

Sorry, I misremembered. The allocations won't fail, but we'll erroneously wake up the UMA reclaim thread. See r327485.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Jun 4 2019, 7:37 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.