Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator

[Christoph Lameter]

On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> On 2/22/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > This is a new slab allocator which was motivated by the complexity of the
> > existing code in mm/slab.c. It attempts to address a variety of concerns
> > with the existing implementation.
> 
> So do you want to add a new allocator or replace slab?

Add. The performance and quality is not comparable to SLAB at this point.

> On 2/22/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > B. Storage overhead of object queues
> 
> Does this make sense for non-NUMA too? If not, can we disable the
> queues for NUMA in current slab?

Given the locking scheme in the current slab you cannot do that. Otherwise
there will be a single lock taken for every operation limiting performace

> On 2/22/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > C. SLAB metadata overhead
> 
> Can be done for the current slab code too, no?

The per slab metadata of the SLAB does not fit into the page_struct. 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/