On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 8:15 AM Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 22-08-22 08:06:14, Shakeel Butt wrote: > [...] > > > > struct page_counter { > > > > + /* > > > > + * Make sure 'usage' does not share cacheline with any other field. The > > > > + * memcg->memory.usage is a hot member of struct mem_cgroup. > > > > + */ > > > > + PC_PADDING(_pad1_); > > > > > > Why don't you simply require alignment for the structure? > > > > I don't just want the alignment of the structure. I want different > > fields of this structure to not share the cache line. More > > specifically the 'high' and 'usage' fields. With this change the usage > > will be its own cache line, the read-most fields will be on separate > > cache line and the fields which sometimes get updated on charge path > > based on some condition will be a different cache line from the > > previous two. > > I do not follow. If you make an explicit requirement for the structure > alignement then the first field in the structure will be guarantied to > have that alignement and you achieve the rest to be in the other cache > line by adding padding behind that. Oh, you were talking explicitly about _pad1_, yes, we can remove it and make the struct cache align. I will do it in the next version.