From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 14:05:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [patch 09/18] SLUB: Trigger defragmentation from memory reclaim In-Reply-To: <20080407231137.6e3a38cd.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <20080404230158.365359425@sgi.com> <20080404230227.768964864@sgi.com> <20080407231137.6e3a38cd.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Mel Gorman , andi@firstfloor.org, Nick Piggin , Rik van Riel , Pekka Enberg List-ID: On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > > + * zone is the zone for which we are shrinking the slabs. If the intent > > + * is to do a global shrink then zone may be NULL. Specification of a > > + * zone is currently only used to limit slab defragmentation to a NUMA node. > > + * The performace of shrink_slab would be better (in particular under NUMA) > > + * if it could be targeted as a whole to the zone that is under memory > > + * pressure but the VFS infrastructure does not allow that at the present > > + * time. > > Surely this will falsely trigger the ->next_defrag logic? slab reclaim is run rarely so I thought that these races do not matter much. We could put that next_defrag logic into the per node structure and protect it by taking the partial list lock if we wanted to be race safe. -- 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