Re: [PATCH] procfs: provide slub's /proc/slabinfo

[Ingo Molnar]

* Matt Mackall <mpm@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Which means that SLOB could also trivially implement the same thing, 
> > with no new #ifdef'fery or other crud.
> 
> Except SLOB's emulation of slabs is so thin, it doesn't have the 
> relevant information. We have a very small struct kmem_cache, which I 
> suppose could contain a counter. But we don't have anything like the 
> kmalloc slabs, so you'd only be getting half the picture anyway. The 
> output of slabtop would simply be misleading because there are no 
> underlying "slabs" in the first place.

i think SLOB/embedded is sufficiently special that a "no /proc/slabinfo" 
restriction is perfectly supportable. (for instance it's only selectable 
if CONFIG_EMBEDDED=y) If a SLOB user has any memory allocation problems 
it's worth going to the bigger allocators anyway, to get all the 
debugging goodies.

btw., do you think it would be worth/possible to have build mode for 
SLUB that is acceptably close to the memory efficiency of SLOB? (and 
hence work towards unifying all the 3 allocators into SLUB in essence)

right now we are far away from it - SLUB has an order of magnitude 
larger .o than SLOB, even on UP. I'm wondering why that is so - SLUB's 
data structures _are_ quite compact and could in theory be used in a 
SLOB-alike way. Perhaps one problem is that much of SLUB's debugging 
code is always built in?

	Ingo
--
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/