[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57B40EA5.9040600@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 00:13:41 -0700
From: aruna.ramakrishna@...cle.com
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Cc: Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/slab: Improve performance of gathering slabinfo
stats
On 08/16/2016 08:52 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2016, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>
>> In SLUB, nr_slabs is manipulated without holding a lock so atomic
>> operation should be used.
>
> It could be moved under the node lock.
>
Christoph, Joonsoo,
I agree that nr_slabs could be common between SLAB and SLUB, but I think
that should be a separate patch, since converting nr_slabs to unsigned
long for SLUB will cause quite a bit of change in mm/slub.c that is not
related to adding counters to SLAB.
I'll send out an updated slab counters patch with Joonsoo's suggested
fix tomorrow (nr_slabs will be unsigned long for SLAB only, and there
will be a separate definition for SLUB), and once that's in, I'll create
a new patch that makes nr_slabs common for SLAB and SLUB, and also
converts total_objects to unsigned long. Maybe it can include some more
cleanup too. Does that sound acceptable?
Thanks,
Aruna
Powered by blists - more mailing lists