[Octave-patch-tracker] [patch #9924] Suggestion for a memory() function

[Lars Kindermann]

Follow-up Comment #26, patch #9924 (project octave):

@markus, re comment #22
>> I also added a fallback to MemFree if MemAvailable doesn't exist in
>> proc/meminfo. Is this ok? Or is there something better we can do? 

This is from the kernel patch comment that indrocuded the MemAvailable field:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=34e431b0ae398fc54ea69ff85ec700722c9da773

"Many load balancing and workload placing programs check /proc/meminfo to
estimate how much free memory is available.  They generally do this by
adding up "free" and "cached", which was fine ten years ago, but is
pretty much guaranteed to be wrong today."

So I added the "ten year old way" to memory.m as a fallback:


  if (isfield(meminfo_numeric,"MemAvailable"))
    AvailableRAM = meminfo_numeric.MemAvailable * kiB;
  else
    # on kernels from before 2014 MemAvailable is not present
    # this is a rough estimate to be used instead 
    AvailableRAM = (meminfo_numeric.FreeRAM + meminfo_numeric.Cached) * kiB;
  endif



    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?9924>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via Savannah
  https://savannah.gnu.org/