> I just had a look at 2.1.56 and it seems to me that the state machine
> stays parked to a 'reaper' as long as it succeeds for the lower priority,
> first try with i=6.
> The fact that kmem_cache_reap() behaviour does not use the priority (i)
> (forced to 0) is highly broken in my opinion.
> I missed the reason of using always priority 0 for kmem_cache_reap().
> Is its reaping mechanism so broken?
My original reaping mechanism was based on priority, but someone else
decided [correctly] to always pass in the highest priority without
removing the support for other priorities.
Now that the SLAB is being more heavily used, the reaping algorithm is
showing its weakness. I guess I need to re-visit it...or somebody else
does.
Regards,
markhe