From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1F086B02A3 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 19:52:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from hpaq1.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq1.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.1]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o6ENqTQs027899 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:52:29 -0700 Received: from pwi6 (pwi6.prod.google.com [10.241.219.6]) by hpaq1.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o6ENqRAD031640 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:52:27 -0700 Received: by pwi6 with SMTP id 6so94498pwi.10 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:52:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:52:24 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [S+Q2 00/19] SLUB with queueing (V2) beats SLAB netperf TCP_RR In-Reply-To: <20100709190706.938177313@quilx.com> Message-ID: References: <20100709190706.938177313@quilx.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nick Piggin List-ID: On Fri, 9 Jul 2010, Christoph Lameter wrote: > The following patchset cleans some pieces up and then equips SLUB with > per cpu queues that work similar to SLABs queues. Pekka, I think patches 4-8 could be applied to your tree now, they're relatively unchanged from what's been posted before. (I didn't ack patch 9 because I think it makes slab_lock() -> slab_unlock() matching more difficult with little win, but I don't feel strongly about it.) I'd also consider patch 7 for 2.6.35-rc6 (and -stable). -- 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