Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 23:26:52 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> To: Garrett Cooper <gcooper@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: sysctl for querying kmem_map->size Message-ID: <4CA4F28C.3020804@icyb.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikdrG-LuaoyRmYDdZustcB3%2Bt5JAkt03Un5vTgU@mail.gmail.com> References: <4CA4C63F.4070503@icyb.net.ua> <AANLkTikdrG-LuaoyRmYDdZustcB3%2Bt5JAkt03Un5vTgU@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 30/09/2010 21:52 Garrett Cooper said the following: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> wrote: >> >> Here's a patch that adds a sysctl for querying kmem_map->size, which may be useful >> for system state/resources monitoring: >> http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/sysctl-kmem_map_size.diff >> >> I am quite unsure about sizeof(kmem_map->size) == sizeof(int) hack, but I couldn't >> think of other way to decide whether to use SYSCTL_ADD_UINT or SYSCTL_ADD_ULONG >> depending on real type behind vm_size_t. > > Is the base value of the field size_t? If so, then it's ulong on > 64-bit archs and uint on 32-bit archs. Maybe it's a good time then to No, it's vm_size_t, but it's defined similarly to size_t I guess: vm_size_t -> __vm_size_t -> {__uint32_t or __uint64_t depending on arch} > actually get the sysctl and tunables work that I started on into base. > I have a functioning and tested copy of the tunables work, but I'll > need to do similar for the sysctls as well (des@ and I kind of got out > of sync a few months back). I believe that this is the first time I hear about this project. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4CA4F28C.3020804>