[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <79c1a3a1-f36e-3585-f470-6779f97e2dbd@gentwo.de>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 10:21:05 +0100 (CET)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.de>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/12] mm, slab: ignore SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT with
CONFIG_SLUB_TINY
On Thu, 24 Nov 2022, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT is kinda misnomer these days, as the only thing it does
> is to add __GFP_RECLAIMABLE to cache's gfp flags for the page allocator's
> mobility grouping. I guess the "ACCOUNT" part comes from being counted
> towards SReclaimable (vs SUnreclaim) in /proc/meminfo.
Well these Sreclaimable etc counters visible in /proc/meminfo are used in
the reclaim logic and are quite important there.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists