linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
To: KokHow.Teh@infineon.com
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: Kmem_cache handling in linux-2.6.2x kernel
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 08:46:23 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48736FAF.2050508@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <31E09F73562D7A4D82119D7F6C17298604696CEA@sinse303.ap.infineon.com>

KokHow.Teh@infineon.com wrote:
> Hi list;
> 	I have a question about kmem_cache implemented in Linux-2.6.2x
> kernel. I have an application that allocates and free 64KByte chunks of
> memory (32-byte aligned) quite often. Therefore, I create a lookaside
> cache for that purpose and use kmem_cache_alloc(), kmem_cache_free() to
> allocate and free the caches. The application works very well in this
> model. However, my concern here is if kmem_cache_free() does return the
> cache to the system-wide pool so that it could be used by other
> applications when need arises; when system is low in memory resources,
> for instance. This is a question about the internal workings of the
> memory management system of the Linux-2.6.2x kernel as to how efficient
> it manages this lookasie caches. The concern is valid because if this
> lookaside cache is not managed well, i.e, it is not returned to the
> system-wide free memory pools to be used by other applications, this
> will penalize the performace and throughput of the whole system due to
> the dynamic behaviour of the utilization of system memory resources. For
> example, other applications might be swapping in and out of the harddisk
> and if the kmem_cache_free()'ed memory objects could be used by these
> applications, it will help in this case to reduce the number of swaps
> that happen, thereby freeing the CPU and/or DMA from doing the swapping
> to do other critical tasks.
> 
> 	On the other hand, if the caches are returned to the system-wide
> free memory pool, what are the advantages of using kmem_cache_t compared
> to the conventional kmalloc()/kfree()?
> 
> 	Any insight and advice is appreciated.

Any kmem_cache allocation and frees larger than PAGE_SIZE are converted to page allocator allocs and frees. Thus you are allocating and freeing directly from the general pool.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

      reply	other threads:[~2008-07-08 13:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-07-08  5:15 KokHow.Teh
2008-07-08 13:46 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=48736FAF.2050508@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=KokHow.Teh@infineon.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox