From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
To: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, dgc@sgi.com,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] SLUB: Implement targeted reclaim and partial list defragmentation
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 08:35:38 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705050833310.26574@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070505053211.GZ19966@holomorphy.com>
On Fri, 4 May 2007, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> kick_object() doesn't return an indicator of success, which might be
> helpful for determining whether an object was successfully removed. The
> later-added kick_dentry_object(), for instance, can't remove dentries
> where reference counts are still held.
>
> I suppose one could check to see if the ->inuse counter decreased, too.
Yes that is exactly what is done. The issue is that concurrent frees may
occur. So we just kick them all and see if all objects are gone at the
end.
> In either event, it would probably be helpful to abort the operation if
> there was a reclamation failure for an object within the slab.
Hmmm... The failure may be because another process is attempting
a kmem_cache_free on an object. But we are holding the lock. The free
will succeed when we drop it.
> This is a relatively minor optimization concern. I think this patch
> series is great and a significant foray into the problem of slab
> reclaim vs. fragmentation.
Thanks.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-05 15:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-04 22:15 [RFC 0/3] Slab Defrag / Slab Targeted Reclaim and general Slab API changes clameter
2007-05-04 22:15 ` [RFC 1/3] SLUB: slab_ops instead of constructors / destructors clameter
2007-05-05 10:14 ` Pekka Enberg
2007-05-05 15:43 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-06 19:19 ` Bert Wesarg
2007-05-06 19:46 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-04 22:15 ` [RFC 2/3] SLUB: Implement targeted reclaim and partial list defragmentation clameter
2007-05-04 23:03 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-05 1:04 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-05-05 1:07 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-05 5:32 ` William Lee Irwin III
2007-05-05 15:35 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2007-05-05 10:38 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-05 15:42 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-05 17:11 ` Andi Kleen
2007-05-09 15:05 ` Mel Gorman
2007-05-09 16:34 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-04 22:15 ` [RFC 3/3] Support targeted reclaim and slab defrag for dentry cache clameter
2007-05-05 5:07 ` [RFC 0/3] Slab Defrag / Slab Targeted Reclaim and general Slab API changes Eric Dumazet
2007-05-05 5:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-05-05 5:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-05 7:37 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-05-05 15:39 ` Christoph Lameter
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0705050833310.26574@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=dgc@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/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