[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0903301040160.13333@qirst.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:41:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Martin Bligh <mbligh@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 3/3] slub: sort parital list when thrashing
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009, David Rientjes wrote:
> @@ -1720,6 +1727,15 @@ checks_ok:
> if (unlikely(!prior)) {
> add_partial(get_node(s, page_to_nid(page)), page, 1);
> stat(c, FREE_ADD_PARTIAL);
> + } else if (c->slowpath_allocs >= SLAB_THRASHING_THRESHOLD) {
> + /*
> + * If the cache is actively slab thrashing, it's necessary to
> + * move partial slabs to the head of the list so there isn't
> + * excessive partial list scanning while holding list_lock.
> + */
> + if (!skip_partial(s, page))
> + move_partial_to_head(get_node(s, page_to_nid(page)),
> + page);
> }
>
> out_unlock:
>
This again adds code to a pretty hot path.
What is the impact of the additional hot path code?
--
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