On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:00:06PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > Now for the issues a.k.a. why RFC: > > - I haven't find any other obvious users for reclaimable kmalloc (yet) Is that a problem? This sounds like it's enough to solve Facebook's problem. > - the name of caches kmalloc-reclaimable-X is rather long Yes; Christoph and I were talking about restricting slab names to 16 bytes just to make /proc/slabinfo easier to read. How about kmalloc-rec-128k 1234567890123456 Just makes it ;-) Of course, somebody needs to do the work to use k/M instead of 4194304. We also need to bikeshed about when to switch; should it be: kmalloc-rec-512 kmalloc-rec-1024 kmalloc-rec-2048 kmalloc-rec-4096 kmalloc-rec-8192 kmalloc-rec-16k or should it be kmalloc-rec-512 kmalloc-rec-1k kmalloc-rec-2k kmalloc-rec-4k kmalloc-rec-8k kmalloc-rec-16k I slightly favour the latter as it'll be easier to implement. Something like static const char suffixes[3] = ' kM'; int idx = 0; while (size > 1024) { size /= 1024; idx++; } sprintf("%d%c", size, suffices[idx]);