From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3183AC433FE for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 13:31:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0F4861A02 for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 13:31:09 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org C0F4861A02 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 2DB93940009; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 09:31:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 28A00940007; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 09:31:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 1532F940009; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 09:31:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0150.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.150]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073F7940007 for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 09:31:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin08.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEB1A8249980 for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 13:31:08 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78662469816.08.50777D8 Received: from mail-pg1-f182.google.com (mail-pg1-f182.google.com [209.85.215.182]) by imf06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6027F801C37D for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 13:31:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg1-f182.google.com with SMTP id q201so7125888pgq.12 for ; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 06:31:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=N6WcobQhwKL5iMDYA55jGtZkA/ZPP+IY9Fikzc/zM3A=; b=HrahWYOUhct5Kw3eeUHtB0bTsnyrJL+raXc3dOUEJcYTzpPXCISkkeyizQumFGt/Xb aqiZ8fxZVPZIRAdAJ6S0DHxErqi4W0xvq9cArzGVBWv/eTNTd5GS7d52fhdlTzLXb4++ NdMW6/QH+d9x2tKWIGgl3fQ2cDst3Cf5kmPVByt5G9tcaHO/wfXi8fayBthAYcGAPoW3 brniTTnfV41t3jOnkLOGnRMwbTZ1n8dY7FoDftGc3hE/Aaz4JXH+4LV4M7utqzAOZlif wh2O4L8sosFJSRtSIqUOmo3bj6CA/V5BHsBmSzsnmrD8AN76HCEop7p45JpbtfM5sGi/ 59nQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=N6WcobQhwKL5iMDYA55jGtZkA/ZPP+IY9Fikzc/zM3A=; b=R7UIDl/0MznYFBlRVXW8zfzyjt3LgpUzYfAbPFVQXPpO4C3xejJAseFyZvNexewjfH Vv2mQHhdHVUvOOgugmU88I5lpOEdIBYWBbxYfUybD+TiYwDhwPjDLHB1tT+Tsye3MBv2 Cz4J7M68v4Lk+7hOCWID4yMuzRULV0PPfViS+DBzkjFcNQXxir6nQ43whQbrdzh4VWni bJ5G454XvtQxyyGR39tdF3nC2PTdiw5urT1cASVSUEf2tpyX16QffdkpWu1PitMDLZL9 hNfviXPyHuWhYyy4qKLKKp/8UAqG4A9cf3c1PZaRfcY1ixBhBm+VcAuyOLxfq9BCB1Kc FvFw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ubPP03cd0cWZd54wtNrmHMuEPQzbWxNWldH9IDgDQzH2JfbGs SkVXIkWc4Yoz1JqhLq0itUc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyPqufXl7Lxz1Hi18a6QKzQyZdopN/uYN4g1PhLhHCl0VygweuZElrVzgaB7o1Z1W46+lmPcA== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:9517:0:b0:44c:7b4a:8073 with SMTP id b23-20020aa79517000000b0044c7b4a8073mr4522010pfp.24.1633440667178; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 06:31:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kvm.asia-northeast3-a.c.our-ratio-313919.internal (24.151.64.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.64.151.24]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v7sm2172219pjk.37.2021.10.05.06.31.05 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 05 Oct 2021 06:31:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2021 13:31:02 +0000 From: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com> To: Vlastimil Babka Cc: David Rientjes , linux-mm@kvack.org, Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [QUESTION] is SLAB considered legacy and deprecated? Message-ID: <20211005133102.GB2760@kvm.asia-northeast3-a.c.our-ratio-313919.internal> References: <20210927090347.GA2533@linux.asia-northeast3-a.c.our-ratio-313919.internal> <8aa15f4b-71de-5283-5ebc-d8d1a323473d@suse.cz> <20210928111231.GA2596@linux.asia-northeast3-a.c.our-ratio-313919.internal> <20211003055928.GA7643@linux.asia-northeast3-a.c.our-ratio-313919.internal> <377a622-9a5e-37dc-8f8d-42ae124042b6@google.com> <20211004060109.GA2949@linux.asia-northeast3-a.c.our-ratio-313919.internal> <075fde61-8c28-25ec-0ec1-28b1bdea7c95@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <075fde61-8c28-25ec-0ec1-28b1bdea7c95@suse.cz> X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 6027F801C37D X-Stat-Signature: puy7pg8r9bttitw5psgoapbxa6rkki43 Authentication-Results: imf06.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=HrahWYOU; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (imf06.hostedemail.com: domain of 42.hyeyoo@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.182 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com X-HE-Tag: 1633440668-72366 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 01:39:46PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 10/4/21 08:01, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 03, 2021 at 06:25:29PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > >> I would disagree that SLAB isn't currently maintained, I think it's > >> actively maintained. > > > > I thought it was not actively maintained because most of patches were > > fixups and cleanups for years and as Vlastimil said, new features are > > Fixups and cleanups still count as "actively maintained". The opposite > case would be "nobody uses it because it was broken for years since > commit X and we only noticed now". > Yup, there seems I was differently using meaning of "actively maintained". > > only added to SLUB. development was focused on SLUB. > > > >> I think the general guidance is that changes for both allocators can still > >> be merged upstream if they show a significant win (improved performnace, > >> maintaining performance while reducing memory footprint, code hygiene, > >> etc) and there's no specific policy that we cannot make changes to > >> mm/slab.c. > > > > Good. > > > > I see things to improve in SLAB and want to improve it. > > I will appreciate if you review them. > > It would be great if your motivation started with "I prefer SLAB over > SLUB because X and Y but I need to improve Z", not just a theoretical > concern. > Thank you for advice. by making dumb patches I realized that , yeah, just a theoretical concern does not help. I should have more understanding on internals of slab allocators and on how their characteristics affect performance depending on situation. and most importantly I should have actual evidence of performance measurement. I'm sorry and Thank you for thinking about and answering my (somewhat dumb) questions. But I'm happy that I'm learning a lot from your feedback. > > Thanks, > > Hyeonggon > > >