[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4692E7D4.6060909@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:58:44 +1000
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...r.kernel.org, suresh.b.siddha@...el.com,
corey.d.gough@...el.com, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
Denis Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
Erik Andersen <andersen@...epoet.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 09/10] Remove the SLOB allocator for 2.6.23
Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>
>>>O(n) memory savings? What is that?
>>
>>Allocate n things and your memory waste is proportional to n (well that's
>>O(n) waste, so I guess by savings I mean that SLOB's memory saving compared
>>to SLUB are proportional to n).
>
>
> n is the size of the object?
n things -- n number of things (n calls to kmem_cache_alloc()).
Just a fancy way of saying roughly that memory waste will increase as
the size of the system increases. But that aspect of it I think is
not really a problem for non-tiny systems anyway because the waste
tends not to be too bad (and possibly the number of active allocations
does not increase O(n) with the size of RAM either).
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
-
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