Re: [patch][rfc] acpi: do not use kmem caches

[Alexey Starikovskiy <aystarik@gmail.com>]

Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 7:25 PM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
>   
>> Though I suspect using kmem caches to combat the internal
>> fragmentation caused by kmalloc() rounding is not worth it in this
>> case.
>>     
>
> Btw, just for the record, the ACPI objects are indeed a bad fit for
> kmalloc() as reported by SLUB statistics:
>
> [ The size of ACPI kmem caches with wasted bytes per object in parenthesis. ]
>
>                  32-bit size  64-bit size
>   Acpi-Namespace  24 (8)       32 (0)
>   Acpi-Operand    40 (24)      72 (24)
>   Acpi-Parse      32 (0)       48 (16)
>   Acpi-ParseExt   44 (20)      72 (24)
>   Acpi-State      44 (20)      80 (16)
>
> Though I suspect this situation could be improved by avoiding those
> fairly big unions ACPI does (like union acpi_operand_object).
>   
No, last time I checked, operand may get down to 16 bytes in 32-bit case 
-- save byte by having 3 types of operands... and making 2 more caches :)

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>