From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qa0-f43.google.com (mail-qa0-f43.google.com [209.85.216.43]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDA286B0031 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 10:45:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id k15so8936330qaq.2 for ; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 07:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from qmta05.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta05.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net. [2001:558:fe2d:43:76:96:30:48]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 90si34062062qgf.28.2014.07.02.07.45.00 for ; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 07:45:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 09:44:57 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: mm: slub: invalid memory access in setup_object In-Reply-To: <53B32D80.8000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: References: <53AAFDF7.2010607@oracle.com> <20140701144947.5ce3f93729759d8f38d7813a@linux-foundation.org> <53B32D80.8000601@oracle.com> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Sasha Levin Cc: Andrew Morton , David Rientjes , Wei Yang , Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , LKML , Dave Jones On Tue, 1 Jul 2014, Sasha Levin wrote: > Is there a better way to stress test slub? The typical way to test is by stressing the network subsystem with small packets that require small allocations. Or do a filesystem test that requires lots of metadata (file creations, removal, renames etc). But I also posted some in kernel benchmarks a while back https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/13/459 Pekka had a project going to get these merged. https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/11/29/17 -- 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