Messages in this thread | | | From | Ed Tomlinson <> | Subject | Re: Large slab cache in 2.6.1 | Date | Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:33:20 -0500 |
| |
On February 22, 2004 09:28 pm, Mike Fedyk wrote: > Ed Tomlinson wrote: > > On February 21, 2004 10:28 pm, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >>On Sat, 21 Feb 2004, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > >>>Maybe gradual page-cache pressure could shirnk the slab? > >> > >>What happened to the experiment of having slab pages on the (in)active > >>lists and letting them be free'd that way? Didn't somebody already do > >>that? Ed Tomlinson and Craig Kulesa? > > > > You have a good memory. > > > > We dropped this experiment since there was a lot of latency between the > > time a slab page became freeable and when it was actually freed. The > > current call back scheme was designed to balance slab preasure and > > vmscaning. > > Does it really matter if there is a lot of latency? How does this > affect real-world results? IOW, if it's not at the end of the LRU, then > there's probably something better to free instead...
It mattered. People noticed and complained. In any case, as Andrew pointed out, we get the same effect, without long latencies, in a simplier manner with the current scheme.
Ed - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |