Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.38 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.38;
Date:   Mon, 30 Oct 2023 20:47:06 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
To:     Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>
cc:     vbabka@suse.cz, penberg@kernel.org, rientjes@google.com,
        iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        roman.gushchin@linux.dev, 42.hyeyoo@gmail.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/7] slub: Delay freezing of CPU partial slabs
In-Reply-To: <1dcc9969-da5b-4384-96d8-d03c835f198e@linux.dev>
Message-ID: <edd0197b-7a79-9cb5-8ac5-5d202c2ed51b@linux.com>
References: <20231024093345.3676493-1-chengming.zhou@linux.dev> <d5e40e42-ad02-e53d-c38f-09a4fdf1be88@linux.com> <1199315b-63ce-4be4-8cde-b8b2fd29f91a@linux.dev> <7f70d130-c05a-3cb7-9509-41c21c3014fb@linux.com>
 <1dcc9969-da5b-4384-96d8-d03c835f198e@linux.dev>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 31 Oct 2023, Chengming Zhou wrote:

> The current scheme (which this series implemented) is:
>
> - node partial slabs: PG_Workingset (set or clear with per-node list_lock protection)
> - cpu partial slabs: !PG_Workingset

And then the frozen flag needs to be set. Otherwise slab_free() would 
conclude it is on a partial list?

> - cpu slabs: !PG_Workingset && frozen (set or clear using cmpxchg together with freelist)


> - full slabs: !PG_Workingset

And frozen is clear? Otherwise it is the same as a cpu partial slab.

> As Vlastimil noted, it's possible to drop "frozen" bit for cpu slabs, but
> we keep it for performance, since we don't need to grab node list_lock to
> check whether PG_Workingset is set or not if the "frozen" bit is set.
>
> Thanks!
>