Re: slab-nomerge (was Re: [git pull] device mapper changes for 4.3)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:35 PM, Sergey Senozhatsky
<sergey.senozhatsky.work@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Out of curiosity, I did some quite simple-minded
> "slab_nomerge = 0" vs. "slab_nomerge = 1" tests today on my old
> x86_64 box (4gigs of RAM, ext4, 4.2.0-next-20150903):

So out of interest, was this slab or slub? Also, how repeatable is
this? The memory usage between two boots tends to be rather fragile -
some of the bigger slab users are dentries and inodes, and various
filesystem scanning events will end up skewing things a _lot_.

But if it turns out that the numbers are pretty stable, and sharing
really doesn't save memory, then that is certainly a big failure. I
think Christoph did much of his work for bigger machines where one of
the SLAB issues was the NUMA overhead, and who knows - maybe it worked
well for the load and machine in question, but not necessarily
elsewhere.

Interesting.

                   Linus

--
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>



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]