On 15/03/2026 20:20, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Michael Kelly, le dim. 15 mars 2026 20:17:54 +0000, a ecrit:
On 14/03/2026 16:36, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Mike Kelly, le lun. 09 mars 2026 22:04:19 +0000, a ecrit:
Might it make the resident set for rumpdisk smaller too if parts of that code
don't actually get used by Hurd?
I guess the problem with rumpdisk is rather that we have not actually
looked at its memory pool allocations, and have left it at very large
values which don't make sense for a userland process.
It has a resident set of over 200M on my machine and all (I think) wired. I
was imagining that some of it might not need to be wired or, like you say,
not needed at all.
If it's not wired, it may be swapped out, and then if it's needed, it
can't be retrieved from the disk :)
So it's either needed and then wired, or not needed :)
Exactly so. I'm thinking of memory allocations in parts of the
rumpkernel that are made during its initialisation for services that
Hurd never actually uses but cannot be disabled or removed from the
rumpkernel build. There might not be any of those at all, who knows? An
analysis of where the memory is going is probably required in order to
work out what, if anything, is to be done.
Mike.
