From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 08:17:02 +0200 From: Nick Piggin Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] slob: rework freelist handling Message-ID: <20070523061702.GA9449@wotan.suse.de> References: <20070523030637.GC9255@wotan.suse.de> <20070523045938.GA29045@wotan.suse.de> <20070523050333.GB29045@wotan.suse.de> <20070523051152.GC29045@wotan.suse.de> <20070523052206.GD29045@wotan.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Matt Mackall , Andrew Morton , Linux Memory Management List List-ID: On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 10:28:54PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 23 May 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > > This is intended for distro kernels so that you will not have to rebuild > > > the kernel for slab debugging if slab corruption occurs. > > > > OIC, neat. Anyway, the code size issue is still there, so I will > > test with the fix instead. > > A code size issue? You mean SLUB is code wise larger than SLOB? That's what the numbers I just posted earlier indicate, yes. If you want to do a memory consumption shootout with SLOB, you need all the help you can get ;) OK, so with a 64-bit UP ppc kernel, compiled for size, and without full size data structures, booting with mem=16M init=/bin/bash. 2.6.22-rc1-mm1 + your fix + my slob patches. After booting and mounting /proc, SLOB has 1140K free, SLUB has 748K free. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org