[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1232959706.21504.7.camel@penberg-laptop>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 10:48:26 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Cc: Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] SLQB slab allocator (try 2)
Hi Nick,
On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 16:46 +0100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Since last time, fixed bugs pointed out by Hugh and Andi, cleaned up the
> code suggested by Ingo (haven't yet incorporated Ingo's last patch).
>
> Should have fixed the crash reported by Yanmin (I was able to reproduce it
> on an ia64 system and fix it).
>
> Significantly reduced static footprint of init arrays, thanks to Andi's
> suggestion.
>
> Please consider for trial merge for linux-next.
I merged a the one you resent privately as this one didn't apply at all.
The code is in topic/slqb/core branch of slab.git and should appear in
linux-next tomorrow.
Testing and especially performance testing is welcome. If any of the HPC
people are reading this, please do give SLQB a good beating as Nick's
plan is to replace both, SLAB and SLUB, with it in the long run. As
Christoph has expressed concerns over latency issues of SLQB, I suppose
it would be interesting to hear if it makes any difference to the
real-time folks.
Pekka
--
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