Re: [Q] Default SLAB allocator

[Eric Dumazet]

On Tue, 2012-10-16 at 15:27 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:

> Yes, we have some numbers:
> 
> http://elinux.org/Kernel_dynamic_memory_analysis#Kmalloc_objects
> 
> Are they too informal? I can add some details...
> 
> They've been measured on a **very** minimal setup, almost every option
> is stripped out, except from initramfs, sysfs, and trace.
> 
> On this scenario, strings allocated for file names and directories
> created by sysfs
> are quite noticeable, being 4-16 bytes, and produce a lot of fragmentation from
> that 32 byte cache at SLAB.
> 
> Is an option to enable small caches on SLUB and SLAB worth it?

Random small web server :

# free
             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:       7884536    5412572    2471964          0     155440    1803340
-/+ buffers/cache:    3453792    4430744
Swap:      2438140      51164    2386976

# grep Slab /proc/meminfo
Slab:             351592 kB

# egrep "kmalloc-32|kmalloc-16|kmalloc-8" /proc/slabinfo 
kmalloc-32         11332  12544     32  128    1 : tunables    0    0    0 : slabdata     98     98      0
kmalloc-16          5888   5888     16  256    1 : tunables    0    0    0 : slabdata     23     23      0
kmalloc-8          76563  82432      8  512    1 : tunables    0    0    0 : slabdata    161    161      0

Really, some waste on these small objects is pure noise on SMP hosts.

(Waste on bigger objects is probably more important by orders of magnitude)




--
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/