[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705141324340.12479@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 13:25:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Phillips <phillips@...gle.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] make slab gfp fair
On Mon, 14 May 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > The thing is; I'm not needing any speed, as long as the machine stay
> > > alive I'm good. However others are planing to build a full reserve based
> > > allocator to properly fix the places that now use __GFP_NOFAIL and
> > > situation such as in add_to_swap().
> >
> > Well I have version of SLUB here that allows you do redirect the alloc
> > calls at will. Adds a kmem_cache_ops structure and in the kmem_cache_ops
> > structure you can redirect allocation and freeing of slabs (not objects!)
> > at will. Would that help?
>
> I'm not sure; I need kmalloc as well.
We could add a kmalloc_ops structuret to allow redirects?
-
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