[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1217466583.18911.226.camel@calx>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:09:43 -0500
From: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
vegard.nossum@...il.com, hannes@...urebad.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] greatly reduce SLOB external fragmentation
On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 15:00 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2008, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> >
> > Subject: [PATCH] binalloc: best-fit allocation with binning
> > From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
>
> Shoot me now.
>
> > As suggested by Linus,
>
> I'm happy to hear that the thing worked, but I'm not sure how happy I
> should be about yet _another_ allocator. Will it ever end?
I think you can relax: the logical limit is probably two. We want an
allocator that is both optimally fast and scalable on one end and
optimally space-efficient on the other end and we're unlikely to find
one allocator that is simultaneously both. But I don't think there's
much call for things in the middle of the spectrum.
So if this new one (which I haven't looked at yet) beats SLOB in space
usage and simplicity, I'll be happy to see it replace SLOB.
Finally getting rid of SLAB is a much trickier proposition because SLUB
still loses in a few important corner cases.
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
--
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