Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] slab: defer slab_destroy in free_block()

[David Rientjes]

On Tue, 1 Jul 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote:

> In free_block(), if freeing object makes new free slab and number of
> free_objects exceeds free_limit, we start to destroy this new free slab
> with holding the kmem_cache node lock. Holding the lock is useless and,
> generally, holding a lock as least as possible is good thing. I never
> measure performance effect of this, but we'd be better not to hold the lock
> as much as possible.
> 
> Commented by Christoph:
>   This is also good because kmem_cache_free is no longer called while
>   holding the node lock. So we avoid one case of recursion.
> 
> Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx>

Not sure what happened to my

Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>

from http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=139951092124314, and for the 
record, I still think the free_block() "list" formal should be commented.
--
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/