On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 02:35:33PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > + /* Should a destroy process be deferred? */ > + if (s->flags & SLAB_DEFER_DESTROY) { > + list_move_tail(&s->list, &slab_caches_defer_destroy); > + schedule_delayed_work(&slab_caches_defer_destroy_work, HZ); > + goto out_unlock; > + } Wouldn't it be smoother to have the actual kmem_cache_free() function check to see if it's been marked for destruction and the refcount is zero, rather than polling every one second? I mentioned this approach in: https://lore.kernel.org/all/Zmo9-YGraiCj5-MI@xxxxxxxxx/ - I wonder if the right fix to this would be adding a `should_destroy` boolean to kmem_cache, which kmem_cache_destroy() sets to true. And then right after it checks `if (number_of_allocations == 0) actually_destroy()`, and likewise on each kmem_cache_free(), it could check `if (should_destroy && number_of_allocations == 0) actually_destroy()`. Jason