[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1247219506.771.22.camel@penberg-laptop>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:51:46 +0300
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Janboe Ye <yuan-bo.ye@...orola.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vegard.nossum@...il.com,
fche@...hat.com, cl@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Check write to slab memory which freed already
using mudflap
Hi David,
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > I'm not sure it's such a hard decision. SLAB is on it's way out because
> > SLUB and SLQB code are much cleaner and the debugging support is better.
On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 02:47 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> I don't think that is good enough reason. CONFIG_SLAB is by far the
> optimal choice for netperf TCP_RR on >= 16 cpus and pushing it out of the
> tree, even though it is no longer the default option, isn't an option for
> those of us who live by performance even if it comes at the cost of a
> dirtier implementation (enhanced debugging support doesn't even register
> on my radar since it's useless in a production environment).
Hey, I said SLAB is on its way out (yes, it really is). But I didn't say
we're going to blindly remove it if performs better than the
alternatives. I don't see any reason why SQLB can't reach the same
performance as SLAB after on fundamental level, though. Can you?
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