From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261661AbUBVDXG (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:23:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261659AbUBVDXG (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:23:06 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:2536 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261661AbUBVDXE (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:23:04 -0500 Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:28:24 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Chris Wedgwood cc: Mike Fedyk , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Large slab cache in 2.6.1 In-Reply-To: <20040222031113.GB13840@dingdong.cryptoapps.com> Message-ID: References: <4037FCDA.4060501@matchmail.com> <20040222023638.GA13840@dingdong.cryptoapps.com> <20040222031113.GB13840@dingdong.cryptoapps.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > > Maybe gradual page-cache pressure could shirnk the slab? What happened to the experiment of having slab pages on the (in)active lists and letting them be free'd that way? Didn't somebody already do that? Ed Tomlinson and Craig Kulesa? That's still something I'd like to try, although that's obviously 2.7.x material, so not useful for rigth now. Or did the experiment just never work out well? Linus