Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] kmalloc-reclaimable caches | From | Randy Dunlap <> | Date | Thu, 24 May 2018 09:18:44 -0700 |
| |
On 05/24/2018 04:43 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:00:06PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> Now for the issues a.k.a. why RFC: >> >> - I haven't find any other obvious users for reclaimable kmalloc (yet) > > Is that a problem? This sounds like it's enough to solve Facebook's > problem. > >> - the name of caches kmalloc-reclaimable-X is rather long > > Yes; Christoph and I were talking about restricting slab names to 16 bytes > just to make /proc/slabinfo easier to read. How about > > kmalloc-rec-128k > 1234567890123456 > > Just makes it ;-) > > Of course, somebody needs to do the work to use k/M instead of 4194304. > We also need to bikeshed about when to switch; should it be: > > kmalloc-rec-512 > kmalloc-rec-1024 > kmalloc-rec-2048 > kmalloc-rec-4096 > kmalloc-rec-8192 > kmalloc-rec-16k > > or should it be > > kmalloc-rec-512 > kmalloc-rec-1k > kmalloc-rec-2k > kmalloc-rec-4k > kmalloc-rec-8k > kmalloc-rec-16k > > I slightly favour the latter as it'll be easier to implement. Something like
Yes, agree, start using the suffix early.
> > static const char suffixes[3] = ' kM'; > int idx = 0; > > while (size > 1024) { > size /= 1024; > idx++; > } > > sprintf("%d%c", size, suffices[idx]);
suffixes > > --
-- ~Randy
| |