Re: 2.6.22 -mm merge plans: slub
From: Siddha, Suresh B <hidden>
Date: 2007-05-02 18:54:15
Also in:
lkml
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 05:54:53AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Tue, 1 May 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:quoted
So on balance, given that we _do_ expect slub to have a future, I'm inclined to crash ahead with it. The worst that can happen will be a later rm mm/slub.c which would be pretty simple to do.Okay. And there's been no chorus to echo my concern.
I have been looking into "slub" recently to avoid some of the NUMA alien cache issues that we were encountering on the regular slab. I am having some stability issues with slub on an ia64 NUMA platform and didn't have time to dig further. I am hoping to look into it soon and share the data/findings with Christoph. We also did a quick perf collection on x86_64(atleast didn't hear any stability issues from our team on regular x86_64 SMP), that we will be sharing shortly.
But if Linus' tree is to be better than a warehouse to avoid awkward merges, I still think we want it to default to on for all the architectures, and for most if not all -rcs.
I will not suggest for default on at this point. thanks, suresh -- 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>