From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: akpm@linuxfoundation.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
iamjoonsoo@lge.com, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] Slab infrastructure for array operations
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 16:44:43 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150129074443.GA19607@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1501280923410.31753@gentwo.org>
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 09:30:56AM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2015, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>
> > > GFP_SLAB_ARRAY new is best for large quantities in either allocator since
> > > SLAB also has to construct local metadata structures.
> >
> > In case of SLAB, there is just a little more work to construct local metadata so
> > GFP_SLAB_ARRAY_NEW would not show better performance
> > than GFP_SLAB_ARRAY_LOCAL, because it would cause more overhead due to
> > more page allocations. Because of this characteristic, I said that
> > which option is
> > the best is implementation specific and therefore we should not expose it.
>
> For large amounts of objects (hundreds or higher) GFP_SLAB_ARRAY_LOCAL
> will never have enough objects. GFP_SLAB_ARRAY_NEW will go to the page
> allocator and bypass free table creation and all the queuing that objects
> go through normally in SLAB. AFAICT its going to be a significant win.
>
> A similar situation is true for the freeing operation. If the freeing
> operation results in all objects in a page being freed then we can also
> bypass that and put the page directly back into the page allocator (to be
> implemented once we agree on an approach).
>
> > Even if we narrow down the problem to the SLUB, choosing correct option is
> > difficult enough. User should know how many objects are cached in this
> > kmem_cache
> > in order to choose best option since relative quantity would make
> > performance difference.
>
> Ok we can add a function call to calculate the number of objects cached
> per cpu and per node? But then that is rather fluid and could change any
> moment.
>
> > And, how many objects are cached in this kmem_cache could be changed
> > whenever implementation changed.
>
> The default when no options are specified is to first exhaust the node
> partial objects, then allocate new slabs as long as we have more than
> objects per page left and only then satisfy from cpu local object. I think
> that is satisfactory for the majority of the cases.
>
> The detailed control options were requested at the meeting in Auckland at
> the LCA. I am fine with dropping those if they do not make sense. Makes
> the API and implementation simpler. Jesper, are you ok with this?
IMHO, it'd be better to choose a proper way of allocation by slab itself
and not to expose options to API user. We could decide the best option
according to current status of kmem_cache and requested object number
and internal implementation.
Is there any obvious example these option are needed for user?
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-29 7:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-23 21:37 [RFC 0/3] Slab allocator array operations Christoph Lameter
2015-01-23 21:37 ` [RFC 1/3] Slab infrastructure for " Christoph Lameter
2015-01-27 8:21 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-01-27 16:57 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-01-28 1:33 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-01-28 15:30 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-01-29 7:44 ` Joonsoo Kim [this message]
2015-02-03 22:55 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2015-01-23 21:37 ` [RFC 2/3] slub: Support " Christoph Lameter
2015-01-23 21:37 ` [RFC 3/3] Array alloc test code Christoph Lameter
2015-01-23 22:57 ` [RFC 0/3] Slab allocator array operations Andrew Morton
2015-01-24 0:28 ` Christoph Lameter
2015-02-03 23:19 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2015-02-06 18:39 ` Christoph Lameter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150129074443.GA19607@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE \
--to=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=akpm@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).