Re: Large slab cache in 2.6.1

[Nick Piggin]

Andrew Morton wrote:

> Nick Piggin <piggin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> > This is the incremental min logic doing its work though. Maybe
> > that should be fixed up to be less aggressive instead of putting
> > more complexity in the scanner to work around it.
>
> The scanner got simpler.
>
>
> > Anyway could you post the patch you're using to fix it?
>
> Sure.
>
>
> > > Regardless of that, we do, logically, want to reclaim slab in response to
> > > highmem reclaim pressure because any highmem allocation can be satisfied by
> > > lowmem too.
> > The logical extension of that is: "we want to reclaim *lowmem* in
> > response to highmem reclaim pressure because any ..."
>
> yep.

Yeah this is good. I thought the patch you were proposing was
to shrink slab on highmem pressure.

Apply some lowmem pressure due to highmem pressure THEN shrink
slab as a result of the lowmem pressure is much better.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/