From: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@openvz.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
Sudhir Kumar <skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@valinux.co.jp>,
lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
taka@valinux.co.jp, linux-mm@kvack.org,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move memory controller allocations to their own slabs
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:15:40 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47D60E74.6080109@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080310214100.d7fe7904.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:01:49 +0530 Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Move the memory controller data structures page_cgroup and
>> mem_cgroup_per_zone to their own slab caches. It saves space on the system,
>> allocations are not necessarily pushed to order of 2 and should provide
>> performance benefits.
>
> eh? Those structures are tiny. Which slab allocator has gone and used an
> order-2 allocation and for which structure did it (stupidly) do this?
>
>
When I say order of 2, I meant with kmalloc. They are rounded of to 64, 128 byte
boundary. I wanted to pack these objects more closely.
--
Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center
IBM, ISTL
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul@openvz.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
Sudhir Kumar <skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamamoto@valinux.co.jp>,
lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
taka@valinux.co.jp, linux-mm@kvack.org,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move memory controller allocations to their own slabs
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:15:40 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47D60E74.6080109@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080310214100.d7fe7904.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:01:49 +0530 Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Move the memory controller data structures page_cgroup and
>> mem_cgroup_per_zone to their own slab caches. It saves space on the system,
>> allocations are not necessarily pushed to order of 2 and should provide
>> performance benefits.
>
> eh? Those structures are tiny. Which slab allocator has gone and used an
> order-2 allocation and for which structure did it (stupidly) do this?
>
>
When I say order of 2, I meant with kmalloc. They are rounded of to 64, 128 byte
boundary. I wanted to pack these objects more closely.
--
Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center
IBM, ISTL
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-11 4:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-11 4:31 [PATCH] Move memory controller allocations to their own slabs Balbir Singh
2008-03-11 4:31 ` Balbir Singh
2008-03-11 4:41 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-11 4:41 ` Andrew Morton
2008-03-11 4:45 ` Balbir Singh [this message]
2008-03-11 4:45 ` Balbir Singh
2008-03-11 4:45 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-03-11 4:45 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-03-11 4:46 ` Balbir Singh
2008-03-11 4:46 ` Balbir Singh
2008-03-11 5:00 ` + KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-03-11 5:00 ` + KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-03-11 5:07 ` + Balbir Singh
2008-03-11 5:07 ` + Balbir Singh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=47D60E74.6080109@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=taka@valinux.co.jp \
--cc=xemul@openvz.org \
--cc=yamamoto@valinux.co.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.