From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:28:24 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [patch 06/17] SLUB: Slab defrag core In-Reply-To: <20071115101324.3c00e47d.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-ID: References: <20071114220906.206294426@sgi.com> <20071114221020.940981964@sgi.com> <20071115101324.3c00e47d.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Mel Gorman List-ID: On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > from the partial list. So there could be a double effect. > > > > I think shrink_slab()? is called under memory shortage and "re-allocation and > move" may require to allocate new page. Then, kick() should use GFP_ATOMIC if > they want to do reallocation. Right ? There is no reason for allocating a new page. We are talking about slab allocations. The defrag stuff is run when there is a high degree of fragmentation. So there are a lot of partially allocated pages around. The allocation will grab a free object out of one of them. -- 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: email@kvack.org