On Tue, 12 Apr 2016, js1304@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> @@ -2222,6 +2241,7 @@ static void drain_cpu_caches(struct kmem_cache *cachep)
> {
> struct kmem_cache_node *n;
> int node;
> + LIST_HEAD(list);
>
> on_each_cpu(do_drain, cachep, 1);
> check_irq_on();
> @@ -2229,8 +2249,13 @@ static void drain_cpu_caches(struct kmem_cache *cachep)
> if (n->alien)
> drain_alien_cache(cachep, n->alien);
>
> - for_each_kmem_cache_node(cachep, node, n)
> - drain_array(cachep, n, n->shared, 1, node);
> + for_each_kmem_cache_node(cachep, node, n) {
> + spin_lock_irq(&n->list_lock);
> + drain_array_locked(cachep, n->shared, node, true, &list);
> + spin_unlock_irq(&n->list_lock);
> +
> + slabs_destroy(cachep, &list);
Can the slabs_destroy() call be moved outside of the loop? It may be
faster then?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>