From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932801Ab2IUJeb (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Sep 2012 05:34:31 -0400 Received: from mx2.parallels.com ([64.131.90.16]:48586 "EHLO mx2.parallels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932745Ab2IUJea (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Sep 2012 05:34:30 -0400 Message-ID: <505C33D3.5000202@parallels.com> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 13:30:59 +0400 From: Glauber Costa User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120828 Thunderbird/15.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pekka Enberg CC: Christoph Lameter , , , , , Tejun Heo , , Suleiman Souhlal , Frederic Weisbecker , Mel Gorman , David Rientjes , Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/16] sl[au]b: always get the cache from its page in kfree References: <1347977530-29755-1-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <1347977530-29755-10-git-send-email-glommer@parallels.com> <00000139d9fe8595-8905906d-18ed-4d41-afdb-f4c632c2d50a-000000@email.amazonses.com> <5059777E.8060906@parallels.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/21/2012 01:33 PM, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Glauber Costa wrote: >>>> index f2d760c..18de3f6 100644 >>>> --- a/mm/slab.c >>>> +++ b/mm/slab.c >>>> @@ -3938,9 +3938,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__kmalloc); >>>> * Free an object which was previously allocated from this >>>> * cache. >>>> */ >>>> -void kmem_cache_free(struct kmem_cache *cachep, void *objp) >>>> +void kmem_cache_free(struct kmem_cache *s, void *objp) >>>> { >>>> unsigned long flags; >>>> + struct kmem_cache *cachep = virt_to_cache(objp); >>>> + >>>> + VM_BUG_ON(!slab_equal_or_parent(cachep, s)); >>> >>> This is an extremely hot path of the kernel and you are adding significant >>> processing. Check how the benchmarks are influenced by this change. >>> virt_to_cache can be a bit expensive. >> >> Would it be enough for you to have a separate code path for >> !CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM? >> >> I don't really see another way to do it, aside from deriving the cache >> from the object in our case. I am open to suggestions if you do. > > We should assume that most distributions enable CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM, > right? Therfore, any performance impact should be dependent on whether > or not kmem memcg is *enabled* at runtime or not. > > Can we use the "static key" thingy introduced by tracing folks for this? > Yes. I am already using static keys extensively in this patchset, and that is how I intend to handle this particular case.