linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 00/19] The new cgroup 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Wed, 17 Jun 2020 18:18:58 -0700
From:   Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
To:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
CC:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/19] The new cgroup slab memory controller

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 06:46:56PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 4:07 PM Roman Gushchin <guro@...com> wrote:
> >
> > This is v6 of the slab cgroup controller rework.
> >
> > The patchset moves the accounting from the page level to the object
> > level. It allows to share slab pages between memory cgroups.
> > This leads to a significant win in the slab utilization (up to 45%)
> > and the corresponding drop in the total kernel memory footprint.
> 
> Is this based on just SLUB or does this have a similar impact on SLAB as well?


Just got some fresh numbers on my desktop running 5.8-rc1 + slab controller v6.
It's 8-cores Ryzen 1700 with 32 GB RAM running Fedora 32.

I measured the size of slab memory just after logging into the system.

                   SLUB           SLAB
Original:     463232 kB      312880 kB
Patched:      194840 kB      193392 kB
                   -58%           -38%

Plus perpcu memory usage is also a bit lower.

Thanks!