linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/16] The new slab memory controller

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20191022132206.GN9379@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Tue, 22 Oct 2019 15:22:06 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/16] The new slab memory controller

On Thu 17-10-19 17:28:04, Roman Gushchin wrote:
[...]
> Using a drgn* script I've got an estimation of slab utilization on
> a number of machines running different production workloads. In most
> cases it was between 45% and 65%, and the best number I've seen was
> around 85%. Turning kmem accounting off brings it to high 90s. Also
> it brings back 30-50% of slab memory. It means that the real price
> of the existing slab memory controller is way bigger than a pointer
> per page.

How much of the memory are we talking about here? Also is there any
pattern for specific caches that tend to utilize much worse than others?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs