lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [rfc] SLQB: YASA
Hi Nick,

On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 09:57:25AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > It's a completely different design of the core allocator algorithms
> > really.
> >
> > It probably looks quite similar because I started with slub.c, but
> > really is just the peripheral supporting code and structure. I'm never
> > intending to try to go through the pain of incrementally changing SLUB
> > into SLQB. If SLQB is found to be a good idea, then it could maybe get
> > merged.

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
> And also I guess I don't think Christoph would be very happy about
> it :) He loves higher order allocations :)
>
> The high level choices are pretty clear and I simply think there might
> be a better way to do it. I'm not saying it *is* better because I simply
> don't know, and there are areas where the tradeoffs I've made means that
> in some situations SLQB cannot match SLUB.

So do you disagree with Christoph's statement that we should fix page
allocator performance instead of adding queues to SLUB? I also don't
think higher order allocations are the answer for regular boxes but I
can see why they're useful for HPC people with huge machines.

Pekka


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-03 10:27    [W:0.044 / U:0.660 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site