[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1111231501030.24794@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:06:37 -0800 (PST)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: zhihua che <zhihua.che@...il.com>
cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Fwd: Slub Allocator: Why get_order(size * MAX_OBJS_PER_PAGE) -
1 in function slab_order()?
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011, zhihua che wrote:
> I know what you mean, that is, a slab can only store no more than
> MAX_OBJS_PER_PAGE, actually 0x7FFF, objects.
>
> But get_order(size * MAX_OBJS_PER_PAGE) already returns the order
> which reserves no_more_than size * MAX_OBJS_PER_PAGE memory. Right?
>
Yes, but it reserves too much memory if the conditional is true.
> So I think there is no need to subtract one.
>
If we didn't subtract one, then the order of a slab page would allow for
_more_ than MAX_OBJS_PER_PAGE to be allocated and that's not allowed
because of the restrictions in struct page.
Consider a page size of 4K and an object size of 8 bytes.
get_order(8 * 32767) would be 6, so that's a 4K * 2^6 = 256K slab page
without the subtraction and could allocate (256K * 1024 / 8) = 32768 which
is greater than MAX_OBJS_PER_PAGE and not allowed.
So we subtract one so the compound slab page is guaranteed to allocate
less than MAX_OBJS_PER_PAGE.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists