[lkml]   [2017]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: weird allocation pattern in alloc_ila_locks
On Mon 09-01-17 06:31:50, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 1:58 AM, Michal Hocko <> wrote:
> >
> > Also this seems to be an init code so I assume a modprobe would have to
> > set a non-default policy to make use of it. Does anybody do that out
> > there?
> This is not init code. Whole point of rhashtable is that the resizes
> can happen anytime.
> At boot time, most rhashtable would be tiny.
> Then, when load permits, hashtables grow in size.

OK, we are mixing two things here. I was talking about alloc_ila_locks
which is an init code AFAIU.

If you are talking about alloc_bucket_locks then I would argue that the
current code doesn't work as expected as the rehash happens from a
kernel worker context and so the numa policy is out of control.

I will reply to this email with the patches I have pending here and plan
to post just to make sure we are at the same page.

Michal Hocko

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-01-09 15:46    [W:0.090 / U:1.304 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site