From: Hao Li <hao.li@linux.dev>
To: Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@oracle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@gentwo.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@arm.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 2/2] mm/slab: only allow SLAB_OBJ_EXT_IN_OBJ for unmergeable caches
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 19:56:16 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <by6wakewxlbsdypouzrxzns7ejkg2dsx7zgmbfcl772gpsrk4y@das2q2wrztbq> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260127103151.21883-3-harry.yoo@oracle.com>
On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 07:31:51PM +0900, Harry Yoo wrote:
> While SLAB_OBJ_EXT_IN_OBJ allows to reduce memory overhead to account
> slab objects, it prevents slab merging because merging can change
> the metadata layout.
>
> As pointed out Vlastimil Babka, disabling merging solely for this memory
> optimization may not be a net win, because disabling slab merging tends
> to increase overall memory usage.
>
> Restrict SLAB_OBJ_EXT_IN_OBJ to caches that are already unmergeable for
> other reasons (e.g., those with constructors or SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU).
>
> Suggested-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@oracle.com>
> ---
> mm/slab.h | 1 +
> mm/slab_common.c | 3 +--
> mm/slub.c | 3 ++-
> 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/slab.h b/mm/slab.h
> index 8593c506cbf1..a5c4f981ee8b 100644
> --- a/mm/slab.h
> +++ b/mm/slab.h
> @@ -388,6 +388,7 @@ extern void create_boot_cache(struct kmem_cache *, const char *name,
> unsigned int useroffset, unsigned int usersize);
>
> int slab_unmergeable(struct kmem_cache *s);
> +bool slab_args_unmergeable(struct kmem_cache_args *args, slab_flags_t flags);
>
> slab_flags_t kmem_cache_flags(slab_flags_t flags, const char *name);
>
> diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
> index 904414c3ebb8..d5a70a831a2a 100644
> --- a/mm/slab_common.c
> +++ b/mm/slab_common.c
> @@ -174,8 +174,7 @@ int slab_unmergeable(struct kmem_cache *s)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static bool slab_args_unmergeable(struct kmem_cache_args *args,
> - slab_flags_t flags)
> +bool slab_args_unmergeable(struct kmem_cache_args *args, slab_flags_t flags)
> {
> if (slab_nomerge)
> return true;
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index ae9af184a18b..0581847e7dac 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -7676,7 +7676,8 @@ static int calculate_sizes(struct kmem_cache_args *args, struct kmem_cache *s)
> */
> aligned_size = ALIGN(size, s->align);
> #if defined(CONFIG_SLAB_OBJ_EXT) && defined(CONFIG_64BIT)
> - if (aligned_size - size >= sizeof(struct slabobj_ext))
> + if (slab_args_unmergeable(args, s->flags) &&
> + (aligned_size - size >= sizeof(struct slabobj_ext)))
> s->flags |= SLAB_OBJ_EXT_IN_OBJ;
Hi Harry,
This patch looks reasonable to me. I just noticed a minor point that I
wanted to bring up:
It seems a bit self-referential that SLAB_NEVER_MERGE already includes
SLAB_OBJ_EXT_IN_OBJ, but we're using SLAB_NEVER_MERGE to decide whether to set
SLAB_OBJ_EXT_IN_OBJ.
Do you think it might be helpful to add a comment here for better clarity?
--
Thanks,
Hao
> #endif
> size = aligned_size;
> --
> 2.43.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-03 11:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-27 10:31 [PATCH V1 0/2] Only " Harry Yoo
2026-01-27 10:31 ` [PATCH V1 1/2] mm/slab: factor out slab_args_unmergeable() Harry Yoo
2026-01-27 16:35 ` Vlastimil Babka
2026-01-27 16:42 ` Harry Yoo
2026-01-27 16:49 ` Vlastimil Babka
2026-01-27 10:31 ` [PATCH V1 2/2] mm/slab: only allow SLAB_OBJ_EXT_IN_OBJ for unmergeable caches Harry Yoo
2026-02-03 11:56 ` Hao Li [this message]
2026-02-03 12:32 ` Harry Yoo
2026-02-04 0:45 ` Hao Li
2026-02-05 5:13 ` Harry Yoo
2026-02-05 6:27 ` Hao Li
2026-01-27 17:06 ` [PATCH V1 0/2] Only " Vlastimil Babka
2026-01-27 18:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-01-28 3:09 ` To enable, or not to enable slab merging? That is the question (was: Re: [PATCH V1 0/2] Only allow SLAB_OBJ_EXT_IN_OBJ for unmergeable caches) Harry Yoo
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=by6wakewxlbsdypouzrxzns7ejkg2dsx7zgmbfcl772gpsrk4y@das2q2wrztbq \
--to=hao.li@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=harry.yoo@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=yeoreum.yun@arm.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