[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170129160416.GA1795@esperanza>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 19:04:17 +0300
From: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...antool.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: cl@...ux.com, penberg@...nel.org, rientjes@...gle.com,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jsvana@...com,
hannes@...xchg.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] slab: use memcg_kmem_cache_wq for slab destruction
operations
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 03:54:11PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> If there's contention on slab_mutex, queueing the per-cache
> destruction work item on the system_wq can unnecessarily create and
> tie up a lot of kworkers.
>
> Rename memcg_kmem_cache_create_wq to memcg_kmem_cache_wq and make it
> global and use that workqueue for the destruction work items too.
> While at it, convert the workqueue from an unbound workqueue to a
> per-cpu one with concurrency limited to 1. It's generally preferable
> to use per-cpu workqueues and concurrency limit of 1 is safe enough.
>
> This is suggested by Joonsoo Kim.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Reported-by: Jay Vana <jsvana@...com>
> Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>
> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
> Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
> Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Acked-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists