[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1216218657.3122.66.camel@castor.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:30:57 +0100
From: Richard Kennedy <richard@....demon.co.uk>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
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
On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 09:03 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> 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.
>
/proc/slabinfo says it shows pages/slab not order -- so the numbers are consistent if nothing else.
I'm getting the log message
> SLUB: increasing order dentry->[1] [208]
from my code, so it looks correct. It's just the standard code is
picking order 0.
I'm just rebuilding the kernel & will get you that slabinfo
Richard
--
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