From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 09:21:00 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [SLUB 0/3] SLUB: The unqueued slab allocator V4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20070307023502.19658.39217.sendpatchset@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> <20070308174004.GB12958@skynet.ie> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Mel Gorman Cc: akpm@osdl.org, Marcelo Tosatti , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Memory Management List , mpm@selenic.com, Manfred Spraul List-ID: On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Mel Gorman wrote: > The results without slub_debug were not good except for IA64. x86_64 and ppc64 > both blew up for a variety of reasons. The IA64 results were Yuck that is the dst issue that Adrian is also looking at. Likely an issue with slab merging and RCU frees. > KernBench Comparison > -------------------- > 2.6.21-rc2-mm2-clean 2.6.21-rc2-mm2-slub > %diff > User CPU time 1084.64 1032.93 4.77% > System CPU time 73.38 63.14 13.95% > Total CPU time 1158.02 1096.07 5.35% > Elapsed time 307.00 285.62 6.96% Wow! The first indication that we are on the right track with this. > AIM9 Comparison > 2 page_test 2097119.26 3398259.27 1301140.01 62.04% System Allocations & Pages/second Wow! Must have all stayed within slab boundaries. > 8 link_test 64776.04 7488.13 -57287.91 -88.44% Link/Unlink Pairs/second Crap. Maybe we straddled a slab boundary here? -- 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