| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 07:15:11 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org Subject: Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On 2/22/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote: > > This is a new slab allocator which was motivated by the complexity of the > > existing code in mm/slab.c. It attempts to address a variety of concerns > > with the existing implementation. > > So do you want to add a new allocator or replace slab? Add. The performance and quality is not comparable to SLAB at this point. > On 2/22/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote: > > B. Storage overhead of object queues > > Does this make sense for non-NUMA too? If not, can we disable the > queues for NUMA in current slab? Given the locking scheme in the current slab you cannot do that. Otherwise there will be a single lock taken for every operation limiting performace > On 2/22/07, Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote: > > C. SLAB metadata overhead > > Can be done for the current slab code too, no? The per slab metadata of the SLAB does not fit into the page_struct. - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists