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

[Matt Mackall]

On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 18:21 +0200, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> Hi Matt,
> 
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2008, Matt Mackall wrote:
> > >  SLUB can align these without a 2 byte 
> > > overhead. In some configurations this results in SLUB using even less 
> > > memory than SLOB. See f.e. Pekka's test at 
> > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=118405559214029&w=2
> > 
> > Available memory after boot is not a particularly stable measurement and
> > not valid if there's memory pressure. At any rate, I wasn't able to
> > reproduce this.
> 
> So, I have this silly memory profiler derived from the kleak patches by 
> the relayfs people and would love to try it out on an embedded workload 
> where SLUB memory footprint is terrible. Any suggestions?

Or you could use this (which is a bit broken on modern kernels, but
provides lots of interesting detail):

http://lwn.net/Articles/124374/

I don't have any particular "terrible" workloads for SLUB. But my
attempts to simply boot with all three allocators to init=/bin/bash in,
say, lguest show a fair margin for SLOB.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.

--
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/