On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 03:16:25PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:24 bytes per page.. or ~0.6% of memory gone. This is far too great a
price to pay.
I don't think it's too great, memcg uses for half of that and yet
nobody is booting with cgroup_disable=memory even on not-NUMA servers
with less RAM.
But I'm all for experimenting. It's just not something I had the time
to try yet. I will certainly love to see how it performs by reducing
the max size of the list. I totally agree it's a good idea to try it
out, and I don't exclude it will work fine, but it's not obvious it's
worth the memory saving.