On Thu, 5 Dec 2013, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > Now we have cpu partial slabs facility, so I think that slowpath isn't really > slow. And it doesn't much increase the management overhead in the node > partial lists, because of cpu partial slabs. Well yes that may address some of the issues here. > And larger frame may cause more slab_lock contention or cmpxchg contention > if there are parallel freeings. > > But, I don't know which one is better. Is larger frame still better? :) Could you run some tests to figure this one out? There are also some situations in which we disable the per cpu partial pages though. F.e. for low latency/realtime. I posted in kernel synthetic benchmarks for slab a while back. That maybe something to start with. -- 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>