On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 11:16:36AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 13 May 2014, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
>
> > Currently full slabs are only kept on per-node lists for debugging, but
> > we need this feature to reparent per memcg caches, so let's enable it
> > for them too.
>
> That will significantly impact the fastpaths for alloc and free.
>
> Also a pretty significant change the logic of the fastpaths since they
> were not designed to handle the full lists. In debug mode all operations
> were only performed by the slow paths and only the slow paths so far
> supported tracking full slabs.
That's the minimal price we have to pay for slab re-parenting, because
w/o it we won't be able to look up for all slabs of a particular per
memcg cache. The question is, can it be tolerated or I'd better try some
other way?
>
> > @@ -2587,6 +2610,9 @@ static void __slab_free(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page,
> >
> > } else { /* Needs to be taken off a list */
> >
> > + if (kmem_cache_has_cpu_partial(s) && !prior)
> > + new.frozen = 1;
> > +
> > n = get_node(s, page_to_nid(page));
>
> Make this code conditional?
No problem, this patch is just a draft. Thanks to static keys, it won't
be difficult to eliminate any overhead if there is no kmem-active
memcgs.
Thanks.
>
> > /*
> > * Speculatively acquire the list_lock.
> > @@ -2606,6 +2632,12 @@ static void __slab_free(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page,
> > object, new.counters,
> > "__slab_free"));
> >
> > + if (unlikely(n) && new.frozen && !was_frozen) {
> > + remove_full(s, n, page);
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
> > + n = NULL;
> > + }
> > +
> > if (likely(!n)) {
>
> Here too.
--
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>