Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751476AbWBWShB (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:37:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751373AbWBWSg5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:36:57 -0500 Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi ([128.214.9.1]:1478 "EHLO mail.cs.helsinki.fi") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751143AbWBWSg4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:36:56 -0500 Subject: Re: slab: Remove SLAB_NO_REAP option From: Pekka Enberg To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Andrew Morton , Alok Kataria , manfred@colorfullife.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <20060223020957.478d4cc1.akpm@osdl.org> Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 20:36:52 +0200 Message-Id: <1140719812.11455.1.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 909 Lines: 22 On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 09:20 -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Pekka J Enberg wrote: > > > We need _something_ to avoid excessive scanning of cache_cache. It takes a > > hell of a lot insmod/rmmod to actually free a full page. Maybe something > > like this (totally untested) patch? > > What excessive scanning of cache_cache? If the per cpu cache of > cache_cache has been drained then there will be no scanning just an > inspection if there are zero elements. Look at the loop, it is redundant work (like acquiring/releasing a spinlock). The cache_cache is practically static, which is why it makes sense to leave it alone. Pekka - 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/