Hi,
The sizeof(struct tty_struct) = 3084. Why don't we have a private slab
cache for it instead of getting a page and wasting some precious bytes at
the end? Potentially, we can have thousands of tty_struct allocated
(assuming we have thousands of concurrent users)...
regards,
Tigran
On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 06:54:48PM +0000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The sizeof(struct tty_struct) = 3084. Why don't we have a private slab
> cache for it instead of getting a page and wasting some precious bytes at
> the end? Potentially, we can have thousands of tty_struct allocated
> (assuming we have thousands of concurrent users)...
Potentially thousands, in practice some 10-30.
Wastage will be worse with 8k pages, of course.
> regards,
> Tigran
On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 06:54:48PM +0000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The sizeof(struct tty_struct) = 3084. Why don't we have a private slab
> cache for it instead of getting a page and wasting some precious bytes at
> the end? Potentially, we can have thousands of tty_struct allocated
> (assuming we have thousands of concurrent users)...
A slab cache could only save significant memory if it allocated in
order 2 slabs (order 1 would waste exactly the same memory because
you only had a ~2K gap) Order 2 is nasty and unreliable.
-Andi