On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 9:35 PM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Tue 08-12-20 12:18:47, Muchun Song wrote:
> > Although the ratio of the slab is one, we also should read the ratio
> > from the related memory_stats instead of hard-coding. And the local
> > variable of size is already the value of
On Tue 08-12-20 12:18:47, Muchun Song wrote:
> Although the ratio of the slab is one, we also should read the ratio
> from the related memory_stats instead of hard-coding. And the local
> variable of size is already the value of slab_unreclaimable. So we
> do not need to read again.
>
> We can
On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 3:21 PM Pankaj Gupta
wrote:
>
> > Although the ratio of the slab is one, we also should read the ratio
> > from the related memory_stats instead of hard-coding. And the local
> > variable of size is already the value of slab_unreclaimable. So we
> > do not need to read
> Although the ratio of the slab is one, we also should read the ratio
> from the related memory_stats instead of hard-coding. And the local
> variable of size is already the value of slab_unreclaimable. So we
> do not need to read again.
>
> We can drop the ratio in struct memory_stat. This can
Although the ratio of the slab is one, we also should read the ratio
from the related memory_stats instead of hard-coding. And the local
variable of size is already the value of slab_unreclaimable. So we
do not need to read again.
We can drop the ratio in struct memory_stat. This can make the
5 matches
Mail list logo
