On Sun, 16 September 2007 00:30:32 +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> Movable? I rather assume all slab allocations aren't movable. Then
> slab defrag can try to tackle on users like dcache and inodes. Keep in
> mind that with the exception of updatedb, those inodes/dentries will
> be pinned and you won't move them, which is why I prefer to consider
> them not movable too... since there's no guarantee they are.
I have been toying with the idea of having seperate caches for pinned
and movable dentries. Downside of such a patch would be the number of
memcpy() operations when moving dentries from one cache to the other.
Upside is that a fair amount of slab cache can be made movable.
memcpy() is still faster than reading an object from disk.
Most likely the current reaction to such a patch would be to shoot it
down due to overhead, so I didn't pursue it. All I have is an old patch
to seperate never-cached from possibly-cached dentries. It will
increase the odds of freeing a slab, but provide no guarantee.
But the point here is: dentries/inodes can be made movable if there are
clear advantages to it. Maybe they should?
Jörn
--
Joern's library part 2:
http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/unix-haters/tirix/embarrassing-memo.html
-
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]
