From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
To: Richard Kennedy <richard@rsk.demon.co.uk>
Cc: penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, mpm@selenic.com,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] slub: increasing order reduces memory usage of some key caches
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 09:17:55 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4880A613.1060002@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1216375025.3082.7.camel@castor.localdomain>
Richard Kennedy wrote:
> Slabcache: dentry Aliases: 0 Order : 0 Objects: 22553
> ** Reclaim accounting active
>
> Sizes (bytes) Slabs Debug Memory
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Object : 208 Total : 1188 Sanity Checks : Off Total: 4866048
> SlabObj: 208 Full : 1186 Redzoning : Off Used : 4691024
> SlabSiz: 4096 Partial: 0 Poisoning : Off Loss : 175024
> Loss : 0 CpuSlab: 2 Tracking : Off Lalig: 0
> Align : 8 Objects: 19 Tracing : Off Lpadd: 171072
So we are using 1188 pages before make
> and after a make kernel & a small delay
2399 pages after make
> on 2.6.26 + my patch
579 * 2 = 1158 (saved 30 pages even before doing anything) before make
> after the make
2025 *2 = 4050 pages which are much more than the 2399 with order 0.
So we are wasting a lot more space. You'd probably need to run slab defrag to get that memory back.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
To: Richard Kennedy <richard@rsk.demon.co.uk>
Cc: penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, mpm@selenic.com,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] slub: increasing order reduces memory usage of some key caches
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 09:17:55 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4880A613.1060002@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1216375025.3082.7.camel@castor.localdomain>
Richard Kennedy wrote:
> Slabcache: dentry Aliases: 0 Order : 0 Objects: 22553
> ** Reclaim accounting active
>
> Sizes (bytes) Slabs Debug Memory
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Object : 208 Total : 1188 Sanity Checks : Off Total: 4866048
> SlabObj: 208 Full : 1186 Redzoning : Off Used : 4691024
> SlabSiz: 4096 Partial: 0 Poisoning : Off Loss : 175024
> Loss : 0 CpuSlab: 2 Tracking : Off Lalig: 0
> Align : 8 Objects: 19 Tracing : Off Lpadd: 171072
So we are using 1188 pages before make
> and after a make kernel & a small delay
2399 pages after make
> on 2.6.26 + my patch
579 * 2 = 1158 (saved 30 pages even before doing anything) before make
> after the make
2025 *2 = 4050 pages which are much more than the 2399 with order 0.
So we are wasting a lot more space. You'd probably need to run slab defrag to get that memory back.
--
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:[~2008-07-18 14:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-16 12:29 [PATCH][RFC] slub: increasing order reduces memory usage of some key caches Richard Kennedy
2008-07-16 12:29 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-16 13:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-16 13:21 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-16 13:58 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-16 13:58 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-16 14:03 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-16 14:03 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-16 14:30 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-16 14:30 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-16 14:33 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-07-16 14:33 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-07-16 14:46 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-16 14:46 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-18 9:57 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-18 9:57 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-18 14:17 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2008-07-18 14:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-18 14:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-18 14:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-18 14:42 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-18 14:42 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-18 14:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-18 14:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-18 15:22 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-18 15:22 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-18 17:13 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-18 17:13 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-16 19:52 ` Mel Gorman
2008-07-16 19:52 ` Mel Gorman
2008-07-17 9:48 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-17 9:48 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-16 15:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-16 15:52 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-16 15:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-17 10:09 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-17 16:56 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-07-18 10:17 ` Richard Kennedy
2008-07-18 14:21 ` Christoph Lameter
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=4880A613.1060002@linux-foundation.org \
--to=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=richard@rsk.demon.co.uk \
/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.