On 5/13/20 2:57 AM, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> Btw, I'm trying to build up a prototype with an embedded memcg pointer,
> but it seems to be way more tricky than I thought. It requires changes to
> shrinkers (as they rely on getting the memcg pointer by an arbitrary
> kernel address, not necessarily aligned to the head of slab allocation),
> figuring out cache merging, adding SLAB support, natural alignment of
> kmallocs etc.

Is the natural alignment of kmallocs a problem right now? As kmalloc()
allocations are AFAIK not kmemcg-accounted? Or does your implementation add
memcg awareness to everything, even if non-__GFP_ACCOUNT allocations just get a
root memcg pointer?

> Figuring out all these details will likely take several weeks, so the whole
> thing will be delayed for one-two major releases (in the best case). Given 
> that
> the current implementation saves ~40% of slab memory, I think there is some 
> value
> in delivering it as it is. So I wonder if the idea of embedding the pointer
> should be considered a blocker, or it can be implemented of top of the 
> proposed
> code (given it's not a user-facing api or something like this)?
> Thanks!

Reply via email to