[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 10:54:50 -0500
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...tuozzo.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] slab: add SLAB_ACCOUNT flag
Hello,
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:54:01PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > Am I correct in thinking that we should eventually be able to removed
> > __GFP_ACCOUNT and that only caches explicitly marked with SLAB_ACCOUNT
> > would need to be handled by kmemcg?
>
> Don't think so, because sometimes we want to account kmalloc.
I'm kinda skeptical about that because if those allocations are
occassional by nature, we don't care and if there can be a huge number
of them, splitting them into a separate cache makes sense. I think it
makes sense to pin down exactly which caches are memcg managed. That
has the potential to simplify the involved code path and shave off a
small bit of hot path overhead.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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