[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2101140902210.38517@www.lameter.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 09:04:26 +0000 (UTC)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: SLUB: percpu partial object count is highly inaccurate, causing
some memory wastage and maybe also worse tail latencies?
On Wed, 13 Jan 2021, Jann Horn wrote:
> Some brainstorming:
>
> Maybe you could have an atomic counter in kmem_cache_cpu that tracks
> the number of empty frozen pages that are associated with a specific
> CPU? So the freeing slowpath would do its cmpxchg_double, and if the
The latencies of these functions are so low that any additional counter
will have significant performance impacts. An atomic counter would be waay
out there.
> You could additionally have a plain percpu counter, not tied to the
The performance critical counters are already all per cpu. I enhanced the
percpu subsystem specifically to support latency critical operations in
the fast path of the slab allocators.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists