Re: [PATCH 3/3] dcache: account external names as indirectly reclaimable memory

From: Vlastimil Babka
Date: Mon Apr 16 2018 - 15:59:53 EST

On 04/16/2018 02:27 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 16-04-18 14:06:21, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> For example the percpu (and other) array caches...
>>> maybe it will turn out that such a large
>>> portion of the chache would need to duplicate the state that a
>>> completely new cache would be more reasonable.
>> I'm afraid that's the case, yes.
>>> Is this worth exploring
>>> at least? I mean something like this should help with the fragmentation
>>> already AFAIU. Accounting would be just free on top.
>> Yep. It could be also CONFIG_urable so smaller systems don't need to
>> deal with the memory overhead of this.
>> So do we put it on LSF/MM agenda?
> If you volunteer to lead the discussion, then I do not have any
> objections.

Sure, let's add the topic of SLAB_MINIMIZE_WASTE [1] as well.

Something like "Supporting reclaimable kmalloc caches and large
non-buddy-sized objects in slab allocators" ?