On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 09:51 +0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > I have not had time to get into this. I was hoping you could come up > with something. Thanks! Um, let me have some try. > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Alex,Shi <alex.shi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 23:04 +0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > Sorry to be that late with a response but my email setup is > screwed > > up. > > > > I was more thinking about the number of slab pages in the > partial > > caches rather than the size of the objects itself being an > issue. I > > believe that was /sys/kernel/slab/*/cpu_partial. > > > > That setting could be tuned further before merging. An > increase there > > causes additional memory to be caught in the partial list. > But it > > reduces the node lock pressure further. > > > > > Yeah, I think so. The more cpu partial page, the quicker to > getting > slabs. Maybe it's better to considerate the system memory size > to set > them. Do you has some plan or suggestions on tunning? > > > > > -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>