Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1463371 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v2] mm/slab: Improve performance of gathering slabinfo stats

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v2] mm/slab: Improve performance of gathering slabinfo  stats Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-08-16 05:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2] mm/slab: Improve performance of gathering slabinfo  stats Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2016-08-16 18:00 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v2] mm/slab: Improve performance of gathering slabinfo  stats aruna.ramakrishna@oracle.com - 2016-08-17 09:20 +0200
        Re: [PATCH v2] mm/slab: Improve performance of gathering slabinfo  stats Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2016-08-17 16:40 +0200

#1463371 — Re: [PATCH v2] mm/slab: Improve performance of gathering slabinfo stats

On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 09:21:56AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Aug 2016, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> 
> > If above my comments are fixed, all counting would be done with
> > holding a lock. So, atomic definition isn't needed for the SLAB.
> 
> Ditto for slub. struct kmem_cache_node is alrady defined in mm/slab.h.
> Thus it is a common definition already and can be used by both.
> 
> Making nr_slabs and total_objects unsigned long would be great.

In SLUB, nr_slabs is manipulated without holding a lock so atomic
operation should be used.

Anyway, Aruna. Could you handle my comment?

Thank.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1463908

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016, Joonsoo Kim wrote:

> In SLUB, nr_slabs is manipulated without holding a lock so atomic
> operation should be used.

It could be moved under the node lock.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1464368

On 08/16/2016 08:52 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2016, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>
>> In SLUB, nr_slabs is manipulated without holding a lock so atomic
>> operation should be used.
>
> It could be moved under the node lock.
>

Christoph, Joonsoo,

I agree that nr_slabs could be common between SLAB and SLUB, but I think 
that should be a separate patch, since converting nr_slabs to unsigned 
long for SLUB will cause quite a bit of change in mm/slub.c that is not 
related to adding counters to SLAB.

I'll send out an updated slab counters patch with Joonsoo's suggested 
fix tomorrow (nr_slabs will be unsigned long for SLAB only, and there 
will be a separate definition for SLUB), and once that's in, I'll create 
a new patch that makes nr_slabs common for SLAB and SLUB, and also 
converts total_objects to unsigned long. Maybe it can include some more 
cleanup too. Does that sound acceptable?

Thanks,
Aruna

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1464609

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016, aruna.ramakrishna@oracle.com wrote:

> I'll send out an updated slab counters patch with Joonsoo's suggested fix
> tomorrow (nr_slabs will be unsigned long for SLAB only, and there will be a
> separate definition for SLUB), and once that's in, I'll create a new patch
> that makes nr_slabs common for SLAB and SLUB, and also converts total_objects
> to unsigned long. Maybe it can include some more cleanup too. Does that sound
> acceptable?

Thats fine.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web