[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706261114320.18010@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 11:19:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
suresh.b.siddha@...el.com
Subject: Re: [patch 12/26] SLUB: Slab defragmentation core
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > No slab operations may be performed in get_reference(). Interrupts
>
> s/get_reference/get/, yes?
Correct.
> (What's the smallest sized object slub will create? 4 bytes?)
__alignof__(unsigned long long)
> To hold off a concurrent free while defragging, the code relies upon
> slab_lock() on the current page, yes?
Right.
> But slab_lock() isn't taken for slabs whose objects are larger than
> PAGE_SIZE. How's that handled?
slab lock is always taken. How did you get that idea?
> Overall: looks good. It'd be nice to get a buffer_head shrinker in place,
> see how that goes from a proof-of-concept POV.
Ok.
> How much testing has been done on this code, and of what form, and with
> what results?
I posted them in the intro of the last full post and then Michael
Piotrowski did some stress tests.
See http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=118125373320855&w=2
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists