[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] scsi: fix sense_slab/bio swapping livelock
Hi Hugh,

On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 20:40 +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > > If we had a SLAB_NOMERGE flag, would we want to apply it to the
> > > bio cache or to the scsi_sense_cache or to both? My difficulty
> > > in answering that makes me wonder whether such a flag is right.

On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > If this is critical to avoid memory deadlocks, I would suggest using
> > mempools (or my reserve framework).

Hugh Dickins wrote:
> No, the critical part of it has been dealt with (small fix to scsi
> free_list handling: which resembles a mempool, but done its own way).
> What remains is about "unsightly" behaviour, the system having a
> tendency to collapse briefly into far-from-efficient operation
> when out of memory.

Although you weren't convinced by my arguments, I still have
difficulties understanding why this kind of bad behavior would be
acceptable in an embedded environment and why we don't need to fix it
for the SLOB case as well.

But you do bring up a good point of SLUB changing the behavior on OOM
situations for which SLAB_NOMERGE sounds like a good-enough stop-gap
measure for the short term. I would prefer some other fix even if it
means getting rid of slab merging competely (which would suck as it's
very nice for making memory footprint smaller).


 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-07 23:05    [W:0.043 / U:1.308 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site