On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 4:35 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:48:54 -0700 Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > - /* For oom notifier event fd */ > > > - struct list_head oom_notify; > > > - > > > - /* > > > - * Should we move charges of a task when a task is moved into this > > > - * mem_cgroup ? And what type of charges should we move ? > > > - */ > > > - unsigned long move_charge_at_immigrate; > > > - /* taken only while moving_account > 0 */ > > > - spinlock_t move_lock; > > > - unsigned long move_lock_flags; > > > - > > > CACHELINE_PADDING(_pad1_); > > > > Let's also remove these _pad1_ and also _pad2_ as well as this > > rearrangement nullifies the reasons behind these paddings. We need to > > run some perf benchmarks to identify the newer false cache sharing > > ields. > > I guess this is going to be a followup patch (please). Already posted [1] and has been picked. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240701185932.704807-1-roman.gushchin@xxxxxxxxx/
