On Friday 27 June 2003 17:22, Mel Gorman wrote:
> I still suspect moving order0 allocations to slab will be a fragmentation
> resistent allocator but my main concern would be that the slab allocator
> overhead, both CPU and storage requirements will be too high.
>
> On the other hand, it would do some things you are looking for. For
> example, it allocates large blocks of memory in one lump and then
> allocates them piecemeal. Second, it would be resistent to the FAFAFA
> problem Martin pointed out. As slabs would be allocated in a large block
> from the buddy, you are guarenteed that you'll be able to free up buddies.
> Lastly, as there would be a cache specifically for userspace pages, a
> defragger that looked exclusively at user pages will still be sure of
> being able to free adjacent buddies.
>
> I need to write a proper RFC.....
You might want to have a look at this:
http://www.research.att.com/sw/tools/vmalloc/
(Vmalloc: A Memory Allocation Library)
Regards,
Daniel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 30 2003 - 22:00:26 EST