On 3/16/21 7:02 PM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 3/16/21 11:42 AM, Xunlei Pang wrote:
>> On 3/16/21 2:49 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>> On 3/9/21 4:25 PM, Xunlei Pang wrote:
count_partial() can hold n->list_lock spinlock for quite long, which
makes much trouble to the system. This series
On 3/16/21 11:42 AM, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> On 3/16/21 2:49 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 3/9/21 4:25 PM, Xunlei Pang wrote:
>>> count_partial() can hold n->list_lock spinlock for quite long, which
>>> makes much trouble to the system. This series eliminate this problem.
>>
>> Before I check the
On 3/16/21 2:49 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 3/9/21 4:25 PM, Xunlei Pang wrote:
>> count_partial() can hold n->list_lock spinlock for quite long, which
>> makes much trouble to the system. This series eliminate this problem.
>
> Before I check the details, I have two high-level comments:
>
>
On 3/16/21 11:07 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Mar 2021, Yang Shi wrote:
>
>> > It seems like CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is a more popular option than
>> > CONFIG_SLUB_STATS.
>> > CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is enabled on my Fedora workstation, CONFIG_SLUB_STATS
>> > is off.
>> > I doubt an average
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021, Yang Shi wrote:
> > It seems like CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is a more popular option than
> > CONFIG_SLUB_STATS.
> > CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is enabled on my Fedora workstation, CONFIG_SLUB_STATS is
> > off.
> > I doubt an average user needs this data, so I'd go with CONFIG_SLUB_STATS.
>
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:15 PM Roman Gushchin wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 07:49:57PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > On 3/9/21 4:25 PM, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> > > count_partial() can hold n->list_lock spinlock for quite long, which
> > > makes much trouble to the system. This series
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 07:49:57PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 3/9/21 4:25 PM, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> > count_partial() can hold n->list_lock spinlock for quite long, which
> > makes much trouble to the system. This series eliminate this problem.
>
> Before I check the details, I have two
On 3/9/21 4:25 PM, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> count_partial() can hold n->list_lock spinlock for quite long, which
> makes much trouble to the system. This series eliminate this problem.
Before I check the details, I have two high-level comments:
- patch 1 introduces some counting scheme that patch 4
count_partial() can hold n->list_lock spinlock for quite long, which
makes much trouble to the system. This series eliminate this problem.
v1->v2:
- Improved changelog and variable naming for PATCH 1~2.
- PATCH3 adds per-cpu counter to avoid performance regression
in concurrent __slab_free().
9 matches
Mail list logo