It's a Linux term. See http://lwn.net/Articles/230975/
AGL
The method that we use for sandboxing sadly causes the kernel to hide
the PSS numbers for our renderers. (Although, on ChromeOS, we control
the kernel so we could fix that I suppose.)
> In the curret (dev channel release) implementation, the USS as
> described there, released when a tab is deleted? Of course I do not
> know what the USS for each is, but I do not see any effect here when I
> delete a tab, until after a power down / reboot.
The private memory for a renderer should be released to the system
when you close the tabs for that renderer. (USS is private memory, but
'private' is the word we use on about:memory.)
AGL
Adam,
If I understand correctly, proportional (==PSS) should be >=
private. Correct?
This appears to be the case here on my cr-48
display for the couple of processes which shows both metrics. But for
the first entry, chrome as a whole, it seems way off. Last look:
private 348K, proportional 70K. What gives?
Cordially, CqN
On Feb 3, 1:25 pm, Adam Langley <a...@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 4:21 PM, CqN <chackoner...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the cr-48, why are the PSS showing N/A for most of the items?
>
> The method that we use for sandboxing sadly causes the kernel to hide
> the PSS numbers for our renderers. (Although, on ChromeOS, we control
> the kernel so we could fix that I suppose.)
>
> > In the curret (dev channel release) implementation, the USS as
> > described there, released when a tab is deleted? Of course I do not
> > know what the USS for each is, but I do not see any effect here when I
> > delete a tab, until after a power down / reboot.
>
> The private memory for a renderer should be released to the system
> when you close the tabs for that renderer. (USS is private memory, but
> 'private' is the word we use on about:memory.)
>
> AGL
--
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromi...@chromium.org
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-dev
I believe that private should always be less then, or equal to,
proportional memory for any processes. However, owing to the
previously mentioned sandbox issue that prevents proportional memory
amounts from being read, that may not be true for summations.
So I'm assuming that you're seeing private < proportional for a line
called "Chrome" or some such. That line is the sum of the private and
proportional values for the processes which are part of that instance.
However, where we don't know the proportional memory for a process, it
counts as zero.
AGL