| To: | Mark Goodwin <markgw@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Meminfo confusion |
| From: | Keith Owens <kaos@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 18 Feb 2002 12:44:43 +1100 |
| Cc: | Uncle Than <unclethan@xxxxxxxxx>, pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | Your message of "Fri, 15 Feb 2002 10:26:09 +1100." <Pine.LNX.4.33.0202151021001.600-100000@sherman.melbourne.sgi.com> |
| Sender: | owner-pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002 10:26:09 +1100 (EST),
Mark Goodwin <markgw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>Also notice physmem as reported in /proc/meminfo does not
>correspond to real physical mem; it's almost the same, but does
>not account for a small amount of mem reserved by the kernel.
>A way to figure out the exact amount still eludes me .. anyone know?
ls -l /proc/kcore | awk '{printf("mem=%dM\n", ($5-4096)/1024/1024)}'
Works for me on i386 and ia64. Have not tried it on discontiguous
systems. It reports what memory the kernel can see, not what the
machine has, which is exactly what we want for performance purposes.
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: 'No PMCD agent for domain of request' ?, kenmcd |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Meminfo confusion, Mark Goodwin |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Meminfo confusion, Martin Knoblauch |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Meminfo confusion, Mark Goodwin |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |