linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][RFC] slub: increasing order reduces memory usage of some key caches

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <487DFFBE.5050407@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:03:42 -0500
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Richard Kennedy <richard@....demon.co.uk>
CC:	penberg@...helsinki.fi, mpm@...enic.com,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] slub: increasing order reduces memory usage of	some
 key caches

Richard Kennedy wrote:

> before
> dentry             82136  82137    208   19    1 : tunables    0    0    0 : slabdata   4323   4323      0
> after
> dentry             79482  79482    208   39    2 : tunables    0    0    0 : slabdata   2038   2038      0

19 objects with an order 1 alloc and 208 byte size? Urgh. 8192/208 = 39 and not 19.

Kmemcheck or something else active? We seem to be loosing 50% of our memory.

Pekka: Is the slabinfo emulation somehow broken?

I'd really like to see the output of slabinfo dentry.


--
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/