Re: [PATCH 3/3] dcache: account external names as indirectly reclaimable memory
From: Michal Hocko
Date: Tue Apr 17 2018 - 02:44:20 EST
[the head of the thread is http://lkml.kernel.org/r/08524819-14ef-81d0-fa90-d7af13c6b9d5@xxxxxxx]
On Mon 16-04-18 21:57:50, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> 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  as well.
> Something like "Supporting reclaimable kmalloc caches and large
> non-buddy-sized objects in slab allocators" ?
>  https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=152156671614796&w=2