From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Vijayanand Jitta <vjitta@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] mm, slab/slub: introduce kmalloc-reclaimable caches
Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 10:03:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <99bb1e0c-15e2-7f8a-19ea-7cf9f49551b1@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0100016397ffdbf2-dc8a305f-efa8-4771-9f2a-3a7568693db4-000000@email.amazonses.com>
On 05/25/2018 05:51 PM, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2018, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/slab.h b/include/linux/slab.h
>> index 9ebe659bd4a5..5bff0571b360 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/slab.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/slab.h
>> @@ -296,11 +296,16 @@ static inline void __check_heap_object(const void *ptr, unsigned long n,
>> (KMALLOC_MIN_SIZE) : 16)
>>
>> #ifndef CONFIG_SLOB
>> -extern struct kmem_cache *kmalloc_caches[KMALLOC_SHIFT_HIGH + 1];
>> +extern struct kmem_cache *kmalloc_caches[2][KMALLOC_SHIFT_HIGH + 1];
>> #ifdef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA
>> extern struct kmem_cache *kmalloc_dma_caches[KMALLOC_SHIFT_HIGH + 1];
>> #endif
>
> In the existing code we used a different array name for the DMA caches.
> This is a similar situation.
>
> I would suggest to use
>
> kmalloc_reclaimable_caches[]
>
> or make it consistent by folding the DMA caches into the array too (but
> then note the issues below).
>
>> @@ -536,12 +541,13 @@ static __always_inline void *kmalloc(size_t size, gfp_t flags)
>> #ifndef CONFIG_SLOB
>> if (!(flags & GFP_DMA)) {
>> unsigned int index = kmalloc_index(size);
>> + unsigned int recl = kmalloc_reclaimable(flags);
>
> This is a hotpath reserved for regular allocations. The reclaimable slabs
> need to be handled like the DMA slabs. So check for GFP_DMA plus the
> reclaimable flags.
Yeah I thought that by doing reclaimable via array index manipulation
and not a branch, there would be no noticeable overhead. And GFP_DMA
should go away eventually. I will see if I can convert GFP_DMA to
another index, and completely remove the branch quoted above.
>> @@ -588,12 +594,13 @@ static __always_inline void *kmalloc_node(size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node)
>> if (__builtin_constant_p(size) &&
>> size <= KMALLOC_MAX_CACHE_SIZE && !(flags & GFP_DMA)) {
>> unsigned int i = kmalloc_index(size);
>> + unsigned int recl = kmalloc_reclaimable(flags);
>>
>
>
> Same situation here and additional times below.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-28 16:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-24 11:00 [RFC PATCH 0/5] " Vlastimil Babka
2018-05-24 11:00 ` [RFC PATCH 1/5] mm, slab/slub: introduce " Vlastimil Babka
2018-05-25 15:51 ` Christopher Lameter
2018-05-28 8:03 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2018-05-24 11:00 ` [RFC PATCH 2/5] mm, slab: allocate off-slab freelists as reclaimable when appropriate Vlastimil Babka
2018-05-24 11:00 ` [RFC PATCH 3/5] dcache: allocate external names from reclaimable kmalloc caches Vlastimil Babka
2018-05-24 11:00 ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] mm: rename and change semantics of nr_indirectly_reclaimable_bytes Vlastimil Babka
2018-05-25 15:59 ` Christopher Lameter
2018-05-24 11:00 ` [RFC PATCH 5/5] mm, proc: add NR_RECLAIMABLE to /proc/meminfo Vlastimil Babka
2018-05-24 11:43 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] kmalloc-reclaimable caches Matthew Wilcox
2018-05-24 16:18 ` Randy Dunlap
2018-05-24 18:40 ` Randy Dunlap
2018-05-24 18:48 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-05-24 12:13 ` Roman Gushchin
2018-05-24 15:52 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-05-24 17:35 ` Laura Abbott
2018-05-24 15:32 ` Johannes Weiner
2018-05-28 8:15 ` Vlastimil Babka
2018-05-29 17:58 ` Johannes Weiner
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=99bb1e0c-15e2-7f8a-19ea-7cf9f49551b1@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=guro@fb.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=vjitta@codeaurora.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