Date: 24 Jan 2006 10:52:59 -0500 From: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org> To: "Michael P. Soulier" <msoulier@digitaltorque.ca> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: understanding virtual memory Message-ID: <44irs9sjvo.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> In-Reply-To: <20060124144133.GD29380@tigger.digitaltorque.ca> References: <20060121020941.GE19607@tigger.digitaltorque.ca> <44u0bvdml9.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> <20060124144133.GD29380@tigger.digitaltorque.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Michael P. Soulier" <msoulier@digitaltorque.ca> writes: > On 23/01/06 Lowell Gilbert said: > > > "Michael P. Soulier" <msoulier@digitaltorque.ca> writes: > > > > > [msoulier@kanga ~]$ sysctl -a | grep Memory > > > Virtual Memory: (Total: 724K, Active 545156K) > > > Real Memory: (Total: 232508K Active 124272K) > > > Shared Virtual Memory: (Total: 24684K Active: 11880K) > > > Shared Real Memory: (Total: 12124K Active: 6756K) > > > Free Memory Pages: 14852K > > > > > > How can I have 724K of virtual memory with 545156K active? Am I reading this > > > wrong? > > > > On a quick look, it seems like a wraparound bug... > > Does anyone know if it's a known problem? If not, I'd like to open a bug > report. I only did a three-minute code inspection to reach my conclusion. For me, I'd want to be a little more sure what's going on before logging a bug. Preferably have a fix, too. I don't have time for that right now, but feel free to do it yourself. Try changing sysctl.c so that the memory calculation is done in a wider data type...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44irs9sjvo.fsf>