[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200618011858.GC24694@carbon.DHCP.thefacebook.com>
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!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists