Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] SLUB: what's next?

[Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>]

On 4/30/24 5:42 PM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'd like to propose a session about the next steps for SLUB. This is
> different from the BOF about sheaves that Matthew suggested, which would be
> not suitable for the whole group due to being not fleshed out enough yet.
> But the session could be scheduled after the BOF so if we do brainstorm
> something promising there, the result could be discussed as part of the full
> session.

Since I've been asked if the slides could be shared, here goes:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fHozm2y97Biceh19e_aL5PrHLAZFntZW/view

> Aside from that my preliminary plan is to discuss:
> 
> - what was made possible by reducing the slab allocators implementations to
> a single one, and what else could be done now with a single implementation
> 
> - the work-in-progress work (for now in the context of maple tree) on SLUB
> per-cpu array caches and preallocation
> 
> - what functionality would SLUB need to gain so the extra caching done by
> bpf allocator on top wouldn't be necessary? (kernel/bpf/memalloc.c)
> 
> - similar wrt lib/objpool.c (did you even noticed it was added? :)
> 
> - maybe the mempool functionality could be better integrated as well?
> 
> - are there more cases where people have invented layers outside mm and that
> could be integrated with some effort? IIRC io_uring also has some caching on
> top currently...
> 
> - better/more efficient memcg integration?
> 
> - any other features people would like SLUB to have?
> 
> Thanks,
> Vlastimil