On Wed, 2 May 2007 11:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
Christoph Lameter [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, 2 May 2007, Hugh Dickins wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 2 May 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote:

quoted

But these are arch specific problems. We could use 
ARCH_USES_SLAB_PAGE_STRUCT to disable SLUB on these platforms.

As a quick hack, sure.  But every ARCH_USES_SLAB_PAGE_STRUCT
diminishes the testing SLUB will get.  If the idea is that we're
going to support both SLAB and SLUB, some arches with one, some
with another, some with either, for more than a single release,
then I'm back to saying SLUB is being pushed in too early.
I can understand people wanting pluggable schedulers,
but pluggable slab allocators?

This is a sensitive piece of the kernel as you say and we better allow the 
running of two allocator for some time to make sure that it behaves in all 
load situations. The design is fundamentally different so its performance 
characteristics may diverge significantly and perhaps there will be corner 
cases for each where they do the best job.

eek.  We'd need to fix those corner cases then.  Our endgame
here really must be rm mm/slab.c.

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>