[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071221120908.GA15926@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:09:08 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: Major regression on hackbench with SLUB (more numbers)
* Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote:
> Hmmmm... Some tests here on an 8p 8G machine:
> In an extreme case (boot with slub_min_order=9 to get huge page sized
> slabs) SLUB can win against SLAB:
>
> N=10 Time: 0.338 Minimally faster
> N=20 Time: 0.560 10% faster
> N=50 Time: 1.353 15% faster
what's up with this regression? There's been absolutely no activity
about it in the last 8 days: upstream still regresses, -mm still
regresses and there are no patches posted for testing.
being able to utilize order-0 pages was supposed to be one of the big
plusses of SLUB, so booting with _2MB_ sized slabs cannot be seriously
the "fix", right?
Ingo
--
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