From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14143C2D0E4 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:56:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70EBD20A8B for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:56:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ydfDKZRo" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 70EBD20A8B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux-foundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id F0B9B6B006E; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 17:56:53 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id EBAFD6B0070; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 17:56:53 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D83536B0071; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 17:56:53 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0147.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.147]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6C176B006E for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 17:56:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin12.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 522B0181AEF10 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:56:53 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77477277906.12.gate42_200bc692730a Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B7EB18006FAB for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:56:53 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: gate42_200bc692730a X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2702 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by imf36.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:56:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-73-231-172-41.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.231.172.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 80B1C20872; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:56:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1605221811; bh=qyrksHKsDkON9A2dFh/FzxMGbEbdaxKiptmd9uwhFpQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ydfDKZRoTdcGhT8pZExOdxMueL888zbl3NizoJH4yLQf9340UTy2ShCMV74dYist9 sGvAYW5RMq+nyQ3d9Pzt/YdChvaHcctBj7WmE6B3KpLmNJNMQVhf9UZvrjq3jfMnJR +KX0QnTPyihu5GQt30d5bLOUuVCDIZIPgr59H/g0= Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 14:56:49 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Vijayanand Jitta Cc: Minchan Kim , linux-mm , glider@google.com, Dan Williams , broonie@kernel.org, mhiramat@kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Yogesh Lal , Vinayak Menon Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib: stackdepot: Add support to configure STACK_HASH_SIZE Message-Id: <20201112145649.3fcd9dc4d6d3db4bd26245bb@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <1603372546-27118-1-git-send-email-vjitta@codeaurora.org> <282d7028-498d-50b3-37d4-2381571f9f9e@codeaurora.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000003, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:26:24 +0530 Vijayanand Jitta wrote: > >> 1. page_owner=off, stackdepot_stack_hash=0 -> no more wasted memory > >> when we don't use page_owner > >> 2. page_owner=on, stackdepot_stack_hash=8M -> reasonable hash size > >> when we use page_owner. > >> > >> > > > > This idea looks fine to me. Andrew and others would like to hear your > > comments as well on this before implementing. > > > > Thanks, > > Vijay > > > > Awaiting for comments from Andrew and others. I don't actually understand the problem. What is it about page-owner that causes stackdepot to consume additional memory? As far as I can tell, sizeof(struct stack_record) isn't affected by page-owner?