From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f170.google.com (mail-io0-f170.google.com [209.85.223.170]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB4A46B0009 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 12:55:29 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-io0-f170.google.com with SMTP id d63so10564384ioj.2 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:55:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net. [2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:36]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id me4si12894654igb.100.2016.01.27.09.55.29 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:55:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 11:55:27 -0600 (CST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/16] mm/slab: introduce new slab management type, OBJFREELIST_SLAB In-Reply-To: <56A8FBE4.1060806@suse.cz> Message-ID: References: <1452749069-15334-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <1452749069-15334-17-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <56A8C788.9000004@suse.cz> <56A8FBE4.1060806@suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Vlastimil Babka Cc: Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 27 Jan 2016, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > OK. Perhaps a LSF/MM topic then to discuss whether we need both? What are the > remaining cases where SLAB is better choice, and can there be something done > about them in SLUB? Right now one is driving the other which is good I think. So you may just ignore my cynical comment. -- 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