Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> Balbir Singh wrote:
>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>> + nr_reclaimed += shrink_zones(priority, zones, sc);
>>>> + if (sc->cnt == NULL)
>>>> + shrink_slab(sc->nr_scanned, gfp_mask, lru_pages);
>>> We don't we shrink slab if called to shrink a container.
>>>
>>> This is a fundamental design decision, and a design shortcoming. A full
>>> discussion of this is absolutely appropriate to the patch changelog.
>>> Please don't just hide stuff like this in the patch and leave people
>>> wondering, or ignorant.
>> Yes, we don't because we do not account for slab usage right now. We account
>> only for memory allocated to user space. A good fat comment will help here.
>>
>>
>
> I have already added the comment. But the problem is not in that we
> do not account for kernel memory. Shrinking slabs won't unmap any
> pages from user-space and thus won't help user to charge more. This
> will only make kernel suffer from re-creation of objects.
I meant the same thing. Thanks for adding the comment.
--
Warm Regards,
Balbir Singh
Linux Technology Center
IBM, ISTL
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
