Messages in this thread | | | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: [POLL] SLAB : Are the 32 and 192 bytes caches really usefull on x86_64 machines ? | Date | Mon, 2 Jan 2006 13:45:44 +0100 |
| |
On Monday 02 January 2006 09:37, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On 12/28/05, Andreas Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote: > > I remember the original slab paper from Bonwick actually mentioned that > > power of two slabs are the worst choice for a malloc - but for some reason Linux > > chose them anyways. > > Power of two sizes are bad because memory accesses tend to concentrate > on the same cache lines but slab coloring should take care of that. So > I don't think there's a problem with using power of twos for kmalloc() > caches.
There is - who tells you it's the best possible distribution of memory?
-Andi
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |