RFR(S) 8186770: NMT: Report metadata information in NMT summary
Andrew Dinn
adinn at redhat.com
Tue Aug 29 14:48:21 UTC 2017
On 29/08/17 15:35, Zhengyu Gu wrote:
> I struggled to come out an intuitive way for representing the numbers.
> Hopefully, we can get it right through this review process.
>
> Actually, the formula should be:
> committed = capacity + free chunks + available + waste
Ok, that is essentially what I computed
> capacity : amount of all in-used chunks.
> used: used amount out of capacity
> free chunks: amount of free chunk memory
> available: memory that was committed, but has yet to slice into chunks.
> chunk headers are counted in *used* memory.
Ok, putting headers into the used space doesn't seem an unreasonable way
to accont for 'use'. So, that's fine -- waste is only the small regions
on the end of chunks that are not able to be used to allocate an object.
>> If so then would it not be clearer to account for this waste explicitly?
>> e.g.
>>
>> ( Metadata: )
>> ( reserved=22528KB, committed=21504KB)
>> ( capacity=21327KB, used=20654KB)
>> ( free chunks=113KB, available=0KB)
>> ( waste = 560KB = 2.6%)
>
> Make sense to report *waste*. How about
> ( Metadata: )
> ( reserved=22528KB, committed=21504KB)
> ( capacity=21327KB, used=20654KB)
> ( free chunks=113KB)
> ( available=0KB)
> ( waste = 560KB = 2.6%)
Yes, agreed except that I mentioned I think it is tidier to put free
chinks and available on the same line as I did above? Do you have a
reason for not following that suggestion?
regards,
Andrew Dinn
-----------
Senior Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat UK Ltd
Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander
More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev
mailing list