Re: [rfc][patch] SLQB slab allocator
From: Pekka Enberg
Date: Sat Dec 13 2008 - 04:04:30 EST
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 4:34 AM, Christoph Lameter
<cl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> AFAICT this is the special case that matters in terms of the database
> test you are trying to improve. The case there is likely the result
> of bad cache unfriendly programming. You may actually improve the
> benchmark more if the cachelines would be kept hot there in the right
> way.
Lets not forget the order-0 page thing, which is nice from page
allocator fragmentation point of view. But I suppose SLUB can use them
as well if we get around fixing the page allocator fastpaths?
--
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/