From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758554AbbA0RCS (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jan 2015 12:02:18 -0500 Received: from resqmta-po-04v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.163]:37639 "EHLO resqmta-po-04v.sys.comcast.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754290AbbA0RCN (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jan 2015 12:02:13 -0500 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:02:12 -0600 (CST) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: cl@gentwo.org To: Vladimir Davydov cc: Andrew Morton , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 1/3] slub: don't fail kmem_cache_shrink if slab placement optimization fails In-Reply-To: <20150127125838.GD5165@esperanza> Message-ID: References: <3804a429071f939e6b4f654b6c6426c1fdd95f7e.1422275084.git.vdavydov@parallels.com> <20150126170147.GB28978@esperanza> <20150126193629.GA2660@esperanza> <20150127125838.GD5165@esperanza> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 27 Jan 2015, Vladimir Davydov wrote: > May be, we could remove this allocation at all then? I mean, always > distribute slabs among constant number of buckets, say 32, like this: The point of the sorting is to have the slab pages that only have a few objects available at the beginning of the list. Allocations can then easily reduce the size of hte partial page list. What you could do is simply put all slab pages with more than 32 objects available at the end of the list.