From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 20:49:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] slob: rework freelist handling In-Reply-To: <20070524032417.GC14349@wotan.suse.de> Message-ID: References: <20070523050333.GB29045@wotan.suse.de> <20070523051152.GC29045@wotan.suse.de> <20070523052206.GD29045@wotan.suse.de> <20070523061702.GA9449@wotan.suse.de> <20070523074636.GA10070@wotan.suse.de> <20070524032417.GC14349@wotan.suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Matt Mackall , Andrew Morton , Linux Memory Management List List-ID: On Thu, 24 May 2007, Nick Piggin wrote: > The reason SLOB is so space efficient really comes from Matt's no > compromises design. The thrust of my patches were after seeing how slow > it was on my 4GB system while testing the RCU implementation. They > were primarily intended to speed up the thing, but retain all the same > basic allocation algorithms -- a quirk of my implementation allowed > smaller freelist indexes which was a bonus, but as Matt said, slob was > still more efficient before the change. Well as far as I understand Matt it seems that you still need 2 bytes per alloc. That is still more than 0 that SLUB needs. > What SLUB idea did you think I copied anyway? The use of the page struct. -- 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