From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qg0-f47.google.com (mail-qg0-f47.google.com [209.85.192.47]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BB716B0078 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 10:56:01 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id z60so29981949qgd.6 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:56:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net. [2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:36]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c10si10671899qag.8.2015.01.29.07.55.59 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 29 Jan 2015 07:55:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 09:55:56 -0600 (CST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm v2 1/3] slub: never fail to shrink cache In-Reply-To: <20150129080726.GB11463@esperanza> Message-ID: References: <012683fc3a0f9fb20a288986fd63fe9f6d25e8ee.1422461573.git.vdavydov@parallels.com> <20150128135752.afcb196d6ded7c16a79ed6fd@linux-foundation.org> <20150129080726.GB11463@esperanza> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Vladimir Davydov Cc: Andrew Morton , Joonsoo Kim , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 29 Jan 2015, Vladimir Davydov wrote: > Come to think of it, do we really need to optimize slab placement in > kmem_cache_shrink? None of its users except shrink_store expects it - > they just want to purge the cache before destruction, that's it. May be, > we'd better move slab placement optimization to a separate SLUB's > private function that would be called only by shrink_store, where we can > put up with kmalloc failures? Christoph, what do you think? The slabinfo tool invokes kmem_cache_shrink to optimize placement. Run slabinfo -s which can then be used to reduce the fragmentation. -- 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