From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F3D9620202 for ; Tue, 25 May 2010 10:52:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 09:48:56 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [RFC V2 SLEB 00/14] The Enhanced(hopefully) Slab Allocator In-Reply-To: <20100525144037.GQ5087@laptop> Message-ID: References: <20100521211452.659982351@quilx.com> <20100524070309.GU2516@laptop> <20100525020629.GA5087@laptop> <20100525144037.GQ5087@laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Nick Piggin Cc: Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, 26 May 2010, Nick Piggin wrote: > And by the way I disagreed completely that this is a problem. And you > never demonstrated that it is a problem. > > It's totally unproductive to say things like it implements its own > "NUMAness" aside from the page allocator. I can say SLUB implements its > own "numaness" because it is checking for objects matching NUMA > requirements too. SLAB implement numa policies etc in the SLAB logic. It has its own rotor now. -- 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