Re: SLUB defrag pull request?

[Christoph Lameter]

Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>>> So, isn't it possible to do without get_dentries()?  What's the
>>> fundamental difference between this and regular cache shrinking?
>> The fundamental difference is that slab defrag operates on sparsely
>> populated dentries. It comes into effect when the density of
>> dentries per page is low and lots of memory is wasted. It
>> defragments by kicking out dentries in low density pages. These can
>> then be reclaimed.
> 
> OK, but why can't this be done in just one stage?

The only way that a secure reference can be established is if the slab page is
locked. That requires a spinlock. The slab allocator calls the get() functions
 while the slab lock guarantees object existence. Then locks are dropped and
reclaim actions can start with the guarantee that the slab object will not
suddenly vanish.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/