Re: [patch] SLQB slab allocator (try 2)

[Christoph Lameter]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Nick Piggin wrote:

> > so the max_order is inclusive not exclusive. This will force the order-0
> > allocations I think you are looking for.
>
> Well, but in the case of really bad internal fragmentation in the page,
> SLAB will do order-1 allocations even if it doesn't strictly need to.
> Probably this isn't a huge deal, but I think if we do slub_min_objects=1,
> then SLUB won't care about number of objects per page, and slub_max_order=1
> will mean it stops caring about fragmentation after order-1. I think. Which
> would be pretty close to SLAB (depending on exactly how much fragmentation
> it cares about).

slub_max_order=0 will fore all possible slabs to order 0. This means that
some slabs that SLAB will run as order 1 will be order 0 under SLUB.
--
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/