From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 12:01:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: 2.6.22 -mm merge plans: slub In-Reply-To: <20070502115725.683ac702.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <20070430162007.ad46e153.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070501125559.9ab42896.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070502115725.683ac702.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Hugh Dickins , haveblue@ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, 2 May 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > noooo, we don't want competing slab allocators, please. We should get slub > working well on all architectures then remove slab completely. Having to > maintain both slab.c and slub.c would be awful. Owww... You throw my roadmap out of the window and may create too high expectations of SLUB. I am the one who has to maintain SLAB and SLUB it seems and I have been dealing with the trio SLAB, SLOB and SLUB for awhile now. Its okay and it will be much easier once the cleanups are in. -- 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