From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <owner-linux-mm@kvack.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f70.google.com (mail-wm0-f70.google.com [74.125.82.70])
	by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C63E56B0038
	for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 05:15:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-f70.google.com with SMTP id h188so12883727wma.4
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 02:15:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r5si10084237wmr.74.2017.03.13.02.15.17
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>
        (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128);
        Mon, 13 Mar 2017 02:15:17 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:15:16 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] Slab Fragmentation Reduction V16
Message-ID: <20170313091515.GD31518@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <20170307212429.044249411@linux.com>
 <20170308143411.GC11034@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1703080955180.16208@east.gentwo.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1703080955180.16208@east.gentwo.org>
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
List-ID: <linux-mm.kvack.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Mel Gorman <mel@skynet.ie>, andi@firstfloor.org, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>

On Wed 08-03-17 09:58:58, Cristopher Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> 
> > JFTR the previous version was posted here: https://lwn.net/Articles/371892/
> > and Dave had some concerns https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/8/329 which led
> > to a different approach and design of the slab shrinking
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/8/329.
> >
> > I haven't looked at this series yet but has those concerns been
> > addressed/considered?
> 
> Well yes this has been discussed for a couple of years. The basic approach
> is not only needed for the file systems (like what Chinner was focusing
> on) but in general for slab caches. The objection was regarding the
> integration into the slab reclaim logic in vmscan.c and the filesystem
> reclaim in general.
> 
> Dave and Matthew were at linux.conf.au and we agreed to first try it with
> the radix tree and then generalize from there.  The reclaim logic
> was a bit hacky and we will have to find some better way to
> integrate this.
> 
> There is a video on youtube capturing the discussion (My talk on movable
> kernel objects).

Hmm, OK. There seems to be a slot to discuss this at LSFMM this year so
I hope we can discuss your proposal there.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>