From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qg0-f48.google.com (mail-qg0-f48.google.com [209.85.192.48]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B42306B0031 for ; Tue, 3 Jun 2014 10:48:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id i50so13255239qgf.7 for ; Tue, 03 Jun 2014 07:48:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from qmta13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net. [2001:558:fe2d:44:76:96:27:243]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q65si22437543qga.96.2014.06.03.07.48.53 for ; Tue, 03 Jun 2014 07:48:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 09:48:51 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 5/8] slab: remove kmem_cache_shrink retval In-Reply-To: <20140603090623.GC6013@esperanza> Message-ID: References: <20140531102740.GB25076@esperanza> <20140603090623.GC6013@esperanza> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Vladimir Davydov Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Tue, 3 Jun 2014, Vladimir Davydov wrote: > Still, I really want to evict all empty slabs from cache on memcg > offline for sure. Handling failures there means introducing a worker > that will retry shrinking, but that seems to me as an unnecessary > complication, because there's nothing that can prevent us from shrinking > empty slabs from the cache, even if we merge slab defragmentation, isn't > it? > > May be, it's worth introducing a special function, say kmem_cache_zap(), > that will only evict empty slabs from the cache, plus disable empty > slabs caching? This function would be called only from memcg offline for > dead memcg caches. I am fine with the lower impact version that you came up with later. -- 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: email@kvack.org