[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100525174045.GI20853@laptop>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 03:40:45 +1000
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Zhang Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [RFC V2 SLEB 00/14] The Enhanced(hopefully) Slab Allocator
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 08:35:05PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> wrote:
> >> I'm not totally convinced but I guess we're about to find that out.
> >> How do you propose we benchmark SLAB while we clean it up
> >
> > Well the first pass will be code cleanups, bootstrap simplifications.
> > Then looking at what debugging features were implemented in SLUB but not
> > SLAB and what will be useful to bring over from there.
>
> Bootstrap might be easy to clean up but the biggest source of cruft
> comes from the deeply inlined, complex allocation paths. Cleaning
> those up is bound to cause performance regressions if you're not
> careful.
Oh I see what you mean, just straight-line code speed regressions
could bite us when doing cleanups.
That's possible. I'll keep a close eye on generated asm.
--
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