linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/3] slub: set a criteria for slub node partial adding

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:53:41 -0600 (CST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	"Alex,Shi" <alex.shi@...el.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] slub: set a criteria for slub node partial adding

On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > We should try to batch things a bit, instead of doing a very small unit
> > of work in slow path.
> >
> > We now have a very fast fastpath, but inefficient slow path.
> >
> > SLAB has a litle cache per cpu, we could add one to SLUB for freed
> > objects, not belonging to current slab. This could avoid all these
> > activate/deactivate overhead.
>
> Yeah, this is definitely worth looking at.

We have been down this road repeatedly. Nick tried it, I tried it and
neither got us to something we liked. Please consult the archives.

There was a whole patch series last year that I did introducing per cpu
caches which ended up in the "unified" patches. See the archives for the
various attempts please.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/