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]

Message-Id: <20070224.165311.71091931.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sat, 24 Feb 2007 16:53:11 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	clameter@...r.sgi.com
Cc:	kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, andi@...stfloor.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: SLUB: The unqueued Slab allocator

From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@...r.sgi.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 09:32:49 -0800 (PST)

> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, David Miller wrote:
> 
> > I also agree with Andi in that merging could mess up how object type
> > local lifetimes help reduce fragmentation in object pools.
> 
> If that is a problem for particular object pools then we may be able to 
> except those from the merging.

If it is a problem, it's going to be a problem "in general"
and not for specific SLAB caches.

I think this is really a very unwise idea.  We have enough
fragmentation problems as it is.
-
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/