Re: tbench regression - Why process scheduler has impact on tbench and why small per-cpu slab (SLUB) cache creates the scenario?

[Nick Piggin]

On Wednesday 12 September 2007 06:19, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > The impression I got at vm meeting was that SLUB was good to go :(
>
> Its not? I have had Intel test this thoroughly and they assured me that it
> is up to SLAB. This particular case is an synthetic tests for a PAGE_SIZE
> alloc and SLUB was not optimized for that case because PAGE_SIZEd
> allocations should be handled by the page allocators. Quicklists were
> introduced for the explicit purpose to get these messy page sized cases
> out of the slab allocators.

I heard from one person at KS and one person here that it is not. If they're
simply missing some patch that's in -mm, and there is no longer a SLUB vs
SLAB regression when using equivalent page allocation order, then that's
fine.
-
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/