linux-kernel - Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator

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:	Fri, 23 Feb 2007 01:16:53 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator

On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 10:42:23AM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> > >    SLUB does not need a cache reaper for UP systems.
> > 
> > This means constructors/destructors are becomming worthless? 
> > Can you describe your rationale why you think they don't make
> > sense on UP?
> 
> Cache reaping has nothing to do with constructors and destructors. SLUB 
> fully supports constructors and destructors.

If you don't cache constructed but free objects then there is no cache
advantage of constructors/destructors and they would be useless.

-Andi
-
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/