From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261205AbUEOSHl (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 May 2004 14:07:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261752AbUEOSHl (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 May 2004 14:07:41 -0400 Received: from phoenix.infradead.org ([213.86.99.234]:6924 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261205AbUEOSHk (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 May 2004 14:07:40 -0400 Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 19:07:35 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: axboe@suse.de, torvalds@osdl.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] slabify iocontext + request_queue Message-ID: <20040515190735.A4189@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , axboe@suse.de, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org this just went in: > From: Jens Axboe > > Move both request_queue and io_context allocation to a slab cache. > > This is mainly a space-saving exercise. Some setups have a lot of disks > and the kmalloc rounding-up can consume significant amounts of memory. While I agree on the io_context part, slabifying request_queue is a space waste on most machines out there. The averange desktop has less than a handfull of these, and even for smaller servers it doesn't exactly look like a gain.