From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail203.messagelabs.com (mail203.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.243]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D89F59000BD for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 07:52:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by wwf10 with SMTP id 10so10109799wwf.2 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 04:52:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 17:21:12 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Why isn't shrink_slab more zone oriented ? From: "kautuk.c @samsung.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Minchan Kim , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Rik van Riel Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, I was going through the do_try_to_free_pages(), balance_pgdat(), __zone_reclaim() functions and I see that shrink_zone and shrink_slab are called for each zone. But, shrink_slab() doesn't seem to bother about the zone from where it is freeing memory. My questions are: - Will this be a strain on the direct/indirect reclamation algorithm ? The loops involved expects to free something from that particular zone. shrink_slab might take more time than is required to free up pages from that particular zone which might not be optimal. Am I right about this conclusion ? - If the above is correct, then is there any work happening on this front, i.e., to make shrink_slab functionality and the shrinker callbacks more zone-centric ? Are there any patches that I could look at or download from somewhere for this ? - Are there any other considerations to be careful of for making shrink_slab more zone centric ? Can there be other side effects that affects performance if the shrink_slab and shrinker callbacks are made to free pages only from a particular zone ? Thanks, Kautuk. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org